Hon'ble CHAUHAN, J.—Aggrieved by the order dated 23.10.2010, passed by the Special Judge, Designated Court (Empowered to Try Cases under Prevention of Corruption Act), Ajmer, whereby the learned Judge has framed charges against the petitioner for offence under Section 7, 13(1)(d), (2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 ('the Act', for short), the petitioner has approached this Corrt.

2. Mr. J.P. Gupta, the learned counsel for the petitioner, has raised the following contentions before this Court : firstly, no case is made out under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) of the Act. Secondly, according to the complainant, the petitioner had demanded illegal gratification for accepting the bail / filling of the bail bonds. Whereas the FIR was lodged on 17.10.2006, the bail bonds were submitted on 16.10.2006 itself. Therefore, on 17.10.2006 no work was pending with the petitioner. Thus, there was no reason for the petitioner to demand any money on 17.10.2006. Thirdly, according to the prosecution, there is a taped conversation available. But the conversation does not show that a demand was aver made by the petitioner from the complainant. Fourthly, according to the prosecution, the money was not r

Click Here to Read the rest of this document