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

2009 Supreme(HP) 401

SURINDER SINGH
NISHANT SAREEN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF H. P. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the petitioner:Mr. M.S. Guleria Advocate. For the respondent:Mr.J.S. Guleria, Asstt. Advocate General.

ORDER

Surinder Singh,J (Oral) :-In the year 2005, the petitioner was employed as Drug Inspector at Bilaspur. He is alleged to have demanded Rs.5,000/- as bribe from complainant Dr.Shri Ramdhan Sharma to run his clinic.

2. The complainant reported the matter to the State Anti-corruption department of the Police. Pursuant to that an FIR No.1/2005 was registered on 12.5.2005, under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, in short “the Act”, in Police Station AC Zone, Bilaspur. Thereafter, a raiding party under the supervision of Dy.S.P. AC Zone, Bilaspur, was constituted. The Drug Inspector was allegedly caught red-handed, thus arrested and produced before the concerned court, then remanded to the judicial custody upto 16.5.2005 and later granted bail.

3. After completing the investigation, the police sent the file along with the opinion of the District Attorney for obtaining prosecution sanction, under Section 197 of the Act, from the competent authority.

4. After considering the matter, the Sanctioning Authority i.e. the Principal Secretary (Health) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh found no justification for launching the prosecution against the petiti




















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