R.NARAYANA PISHARADI
P. A. Hariharan – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala, Represented By The Public Prosecutor – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
The appellant is the sole accused in the case C.C.No.26 of 2001 on the file of the Court of the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Thrissur.
2. The appellant shall be hereinafter referred to as the accused. He stands convicted and sentenced by the trial court for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short “the Act”).
3. The prosecution case can be briefly stated as follows: The accused was, at the relevant point of time, working as the Superintendent Engineer in the Public Health Circle Office of the Kerala Water Authority in Thrissur. PW2 Jose, the de facto complainant, had submitted an application in the office of the accused to obtain licence to work as a contractor. Though PW2 went to the office of the accused several times, he did not get the licence. Some other contractors told him that he would get licence only if he paid bribe to the accused. On 13.04.2000, at about 10.30 hours, PW2 met the accused at his office and requested him to issue licence to him. The accused then demanded Rs.1000/-from PW2 for granting him the licence. When PW2 told the accused that he had then no money with him, the accused asked him to
Dipakbhai Jagdishchandra Patel v. State of Gujarat
Meena Balwant Hemke v. State of Maharashtra
Mukut Bihari v. State of Rajasthan
P. Satyanarayana Murthy v. District Inspector of Police
Pakala Narayana Swami v. Emperor
Palvinder Kaur v. State of Punjab
State of Maharashtra v. Dnyaneshwar Laxman Rao Wankhede
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.