Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
S.V.PINTO
State Of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Ramdas Laljibhai Tandel (Detective Inspector) – Respondent
JUDGMENT
S.V. PINTO, J.
1] This appeal has been filed by the appellant – State under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 25/01/2007 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Special Court, Surat (hereinafter referred to as the learned trial Court) in Special (ACB) Case No. 9 of 2001, whereby, the learned trial Court was pleased to acquit the respondent from the offences punishable under Sections 7 , 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (herein after referred to as ‘the P.C.Act’). The respondent is hereinafter referred to as ‘the accused’ as he stood in the original case, for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.
2] The brief facts that emerge from the record of the case are as under:-
2.1] The accused Ramdas Laljibhai Tandel was working as a Detective Inspector at the octroi Check Post, Puna in the year 2000 and was a public servant. The complainant Ajabsinh Mulsinh Rathod, Police Inspector, ACB Police Station, Surat had concrete information that the employees and officers of Surat Mahanagarpalika at the octroi Check Post, under various pretexts were collecting illegal gratification from
A presumption of innocence accompanies acquittal; the prosecution must prove demand and acceptance of illegal gratification beyond a reasonable doubt.
The prosecution must prove the demand and acceptance of illegal gratification beyond reasonable doubt, which was not established in this case.
The presumption of innocence in favor of the accused, comprehensive appreciation of evidence, and the need for proof beyond reasonable doubt in corruption cases.
The prosecution must prove the demand and acceptance of illegal gratification by a public servant as a fact in issue, and the credibility of witness testimony is crucial in establishing guilt.
Point of law: So far as the presumption under Section 20 of the PC Act is concerned, it trite that even the presumption under Section 20 of the PC Act can be drawn only if an accused person has accep....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
