Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.K. RAMAKRISHNAN
State Rep. by Special Public Prosecutor – Appellant
Versus
V. Samuel Jebaraj – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. This appeal has been filed by CBI challenging the acquittal judgment passed in C.C. No.04 of 2011 on the file of learned II Additional District Judge for CBI Cases, Madurai.
2. Brief facts of the case:
The first respondent was working as a Senior Manager, Canara Bank, Nazareth Branch, Toothukudi District and the second respondent was working as a part-time employee in the said branch. P.W.2 was living within the jurisdiction of the said bank. P.W.3 is his daughter. P.W.3 submitted an Educational loan application in the said bank for pursuing nursing Course. The loan of Rs.2,50,000/- was sanctioned on 29.10.2010. At that time, the second respondent visited the house of P.W.2 and demanded a sum of Rs.12,000/- as bribe to give the cheque for the said loan amount. He demanded the said amount on behalf of A1 also. P.W.2 made a complaint to P.W.16 and after receiving the complaint, P.W.16 registered the case and trap was arranged. P.W.4 and P.W.5 official witnesses from other departments were called to act as independent official witnesses, namely as shadow witnesses. In the presence of P.W.4 and P.W.5, the the phenolphthalein test was demonstrated to P.W.2 and P.W.3. P.W.2 wa
The court ruled that the trial judge's acquittal was based on irrelevant contradictions, while the evidence established a clear demand and acceptance of bribe under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The court ruled that acquittals in conspiracy cases must be based on a holistic appreciation of evidence, rejecting selective readings that undermine victims' rights and public justice.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove the demand for and acceptance of illegal gratification beyond reasonable doubt. The judgment emphasized that mere recovery....
Point of law: So far as the presumption under Section 20 of the PC Act is concerned, it trite that even the presumption under Section 20 of the PC Act can be drawn only if an accused person has accep....
Point of law: So far as the presumption under Section 20 of the PC Act is concerned, it trite that even the presumption under Section 20 of the PC Act can be drawn only after demand for and acceptanc....
The appellate court can reverse an acquittal if evidence of bribery and the demand for illegal payments is established beyond reasonable doubt, emphasizing that both parties bear the burden in a plea....
The demand of illegal gratification is essential to constitute an offence under the PC Act. The prosecution must establish the accusation beyond reasonable doubt, and the presumption of innocence fav....
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
