Back
A. D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA
Vanitha Prabha – Appellant
Versus
State Represented by the Inspector of Police, Coimbatore – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
A.D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
Prayer: The Criminal Appeals are filed under Section 374 of Cr.P.C. against the judgment of conviction and sentence made in Special C.C. No. 16 of 2012 dated 11.02.2020 on the file of Special Judge, Special Court for trial of Prevention of Corruption Act, Coimbatore.
1. Criminal Appeal No. 152 of 2020 has been filed by A1 and Criminal Appeal No. 164 of 2020 has been filed by A2 against the judgment of conviction and sentence rendered by the learned Special Judge, Special Court for trial of cases under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Coimbatore, in Special C.C. No. 16 of 2012 dated 11.02.2020.
2. The trial Court, finding the appellants/accused guilty for the offences under Sections 7, 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, convicted the appellant/accused and the sentence imposed on them is as follows:
| Under Section | Sentence |
| 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 | One year of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default, to undergo one month simple imprisonment |
| 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 | one year of rigorous imprisonment and a fine |
The judgment establishes that the demand, acceptance, and recovery of illegal gratification, along with the validity of the sanction order, are crucial in proving corruption under the Prevention of C....
Proof of demand and acceptance of bribe is essential for conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act; mere recovery of money is insufficient without establishing these elements.
The prosecution must establish the demand for and acceptance of illegal gratification beyond reasonable doubt; mere recovery of tainted money and contradictions among witnesses insufficient for convi....
The prosecution must prove the demand, acceptance, and recovery of illegal gratification, and the accused must rebut the presumption raised under Section 20 of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The prosecution failed to prove the demand and acceptance of bribe, leading to the acquittal of both accused.
The prosecution must prove the demand and acceptance of illegal gratification beyond reasonable doubt to establish the offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The judgment establishes that the demand and acceptance of illegal gratification under the Prevention of Corruption Act must be proved beyond reasonable doubt, and minor contradictions in evidence ma....
The court affirmed that a valid sanction and credible evidence of demand and acceptance of bribes are essential for conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
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
