SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(HP) 228

KULDIP SINGH
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH – Appellant
Versus
TILAK RAJ – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant:Mr. Anshul Bansal, Additional Advocate General. For the Respondent:Mr. Paresh Sharma, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

Kuldip Singh, Judge:-The respondent was tried by the learned Special Judge, Una in Corruption case No. 4 of 1999 and acquitted him on 18.10.2001 and therefore, the State has filed this appeal for setting-aside the acquittal of respondent.

2. The facts, in brief, are that respondent was appointed as Patwari vide order Ex. PE dated13.3.1992 and vide order Ex.P-G, he was posted as Patwari at Tahliwal Uperala. The further case of the prosecution is that the father of the complainant Jarnail Singh PW-7 had some land dispute with one Amar Chand and, therefore, the complainant wanted a copy of jamabandi of that land which was situated in Patwar Circle, Tahliwal Uperala. PW-7 Jarnail Singh on 7.4.1996 went to respondent and requested him to supply a copy of jamabandi, but respondent asked him for ‘seva pani’. He demanded Rs.200/- as illegal gratification but complainant gave him Rs.100/-. On 8.4.1996, complainant along with Ranbir Singh again went to respondent in the morning and at that time also, the respondent demanded Rs.100/- bribe from him. Thereafter, the complainant and Ranbir Singh came to the office of Anti Corruption Zone Una and complainant lodged FIR Ex.PJ.

3. The com

















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top