IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A.BADHARUDEEN
S.Navas, S/o.M.Shamsudeen – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
A. BADHARUDEEN, J.
This criminal appeal is at the instance of the sole accused in C.C.No.12/2014 on the files of the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Thiruvananthapuram. The respondents herein are the State of Kerala and the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau, represented by the learned Special Public Prosecutor.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned Special Public Prosecutor in detail. Perused the relevant documents.
3. Here, the prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘PC Act, 1988’ for short) by the accused. The precise allegation is that the accused, while working as Senior Civil Police Officer (Gr) T 9170 at Thumba Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, being a public servant, demanded and accepted ₹1,000/- as illegal gratification from PW1 on 23.11.2012, after making prior demand on 15.11.2012, as a motive for the verification of the passport application of PW1.
4. On filing the final report at the instance of the investigating officer, the Special Judge (Vigilance) took cognizance of the matter and proceeded w
State of Punjab v. Madan Mohan lal Verma
B.Jayaraj V. State of Andhra Pradesh
Rajesh Gupta v. State through Central Bureau of Investigation
Demand and acceptance of illegal gratification by a public servant must be proved beyond reasonable doubt under the Prevention of Corruption Act for conviction.
The conviction of a public servant for bribery requires proof of both demand and acceptance of illegal gratification under sections 7 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The requirement for proof of demand and acceptance of bribes under the Prevention of Corruption Act was satisfied, confirming the conviction of the public servant involved.
The prosecution must prove the demand and acceptance of bribe beyond reasonable doubt for conviction under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
The prosecution must prove the demand and acceptance of bribe for conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act, with circumstantial evidence sufficient to establish guilt.
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....
The standard of proof for demand and acceptance of bribes under the Prevention of Corruption Act is met when evidence establishes exigent demands backed by corroborative testimony, with appropriate p....
Proof of demand and acceptance of bribe is essential for conviction under Sections 7 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
The court established that proof of demand and acceptance of bribe is essential for convictions under the Prevention of Corruption Act, reaffirming the need for credible evidence from witnesses. The ....
The essential elements of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification under the Prevention of Corruption Act are crucial for securing a conviction against public servants.
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.