Back
KULDEEP MATHUR
Mahadev S/o Shri Channappa Honappanavar – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER :
1. By way of filing the present criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner has prayed for the following relief:
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is presently working as a Civil Head Constable at Vidyagiri Police Station, Dharwad (Karnataka). An FIR (Crime No. 121/2022) for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 344, 366-A, 370 r/w Section 34 of IPC and under Sections 9, 10 and 11 of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act 2006 came to lodged against nine named accused persons at P.S. Vidyagiri. The present petitioner along with A.S.I. S.M. Naikar, H.C. 1674-P.B. Hiragannavar and W
The demand for an undue advantage by a public servant, even if not linked to improper performance of duty, constitutes an offense under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The absence of evidence for bribery and corruption led to the quashment of the FIR, emphasizing the necessity of substantiating allegations in corruption cases.
Interference in cases where charge-sheet is submitted and charges are framed is not permissible at the stage of quashing the FIR.
The prosecution must prove demand and acceptance of bribes beyond reasonable doubt, which was not established in this case.
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
