Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
RAJESH MAZUMDAR
Amar Deka, S/o. Late Ratna Kanta Deka – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RAJESH MAZUMDAR, J.
1. Heard Sri M Nath, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. A Bhattacharjee for the appellant and also heard B. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam.
2. The Trial Court records as requisitioned have been received and have been perused with the assistance of the Learned senior Counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned APP.
3. The judgement dated 19.6.2014 passed by the Learned Special Judge, Assam in Special Case no 1/2010, holding the appellant guilty of commission of offences under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment of 1(one) year and to pay a fine of Rupees 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only), in default to suffer simple imprisonment of two months has been assailed in this Criminal Appeal. The alleged date of commission of the offence was 27.2.2004, on which date the appellant had been apprehended in a “Trap Case’ by the officials of the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Police Station Station, Guwahati, (hereinafter referred to as V&AC) when he allegedly accepted a bribe of Rs 1800/- from the informant in connection with a transport permit of a ve
Both demand and acceptance of illegal gratification are required for a conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act; mere acceptance of bribe without proven demand fails to establish culpability....
Requirement to prove demand and acceptance of illegal gratification under the Prevention of Corruption Act is critical for conviction; mere recovery of money is insufficient.
The prosecution must prove both the demand and acceptance of illegal gratification to substantiate a conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act; mere recovery of bribe money without proven dem....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove demand and acceptance of illegal gratification for conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Proof of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification is essential to establish corruption offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Proof of demand and acceptance of bribe as a sine qua non for conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act, emphasizing the necessity of corroborative evidence beyond the complainant's testimony....
Demand and acceptance of illegal gratification are essential to establish offences under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act; mere recovery of tainted money is insufficient fo....
The judgment establishes the high standard of proof required to establish the offence of illegal gratification by a public servant under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, emphasizing the need t....
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
