Back
G. JAYACHANDRAN
State represented by: The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras – Appellant
Versus
R. Venkatakrishnan – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. acquiring disproportionate assets by public servants. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. trials and appeals in corruption cases. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. prosecution's burden of proof on public servants. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. assessment of lawful income and assets declaration. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 5. framework of systematic assets and income evaluation. (Para 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54) |
| 6. final judgment on the appeals regarding acquittals. (Para 62 , 63 , 64 , 66 , 67) |
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal has been filed under Section 378 (1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, pleased to set aside the common judgment passed in C.C.Nos.88 of 2011 [old C.C.No.10 of 2000] & 89 [Old C.C.No.11/2000], dated 11.01.2012 by the Learned Special Judge for cases under Prevention of Corruption Act, Chennai.
Prayer: Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 378 (1)(b) of the Cr.P.C., pleased to set aside the Judgment of the Trial Court dated 11.01.2012 in C.C.No.89 of 2011 on the file of the Special Judge for cases under Prevention of Corruption Act, Chennai.)
Common Judgment:
The State is the Appellant herein. The respondents 1 and 2 are husband and wife. The first
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
