Back
DINESH KUMAR SINGH
Banshraj – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.
The present criminal appeal under Section 374(2) CrPC has been filed against the judgment and order dated 31.08.2015 passed by the learned Special Judge, CBI, Court No. 4, Lucknow in Criminal Case No.01 of 2011 (Computerized No.1600001 of 2011) ( State through Central Bureau of Investigation, Lucknow v. Banshraj ), arising out of R. C. No. 0062011A0001/2011, under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with section 13(i)(d) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, (hereinafter referred to as the "PC Act, 1988") Police Station C.B.I./A.C.B., Lucknow by means of which the accused-appellant has been convicted and sentenced as follows:-
It has also been directed that both the sentences would run concurrently and the period spent in jail shall be adjusted in the
Requirement to prove demand and acceptance of illegal gratification under the Prevention of Corruption Act is critical for conviction; mere recovery of money is insufficient.
The prosecution must prove both the demand and acceptance of illegal gratification to substantiate a conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act; mere recovery of bribe money without proven dem....
Mere recovery of tainted notes without proof of demand and voluntary acceptance insufficient for conviction under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) PC Act; demand is sine qua non, presumption under Section 20 ina....
Illegal gratification – Allegation of demand of gratification and acceptance made by a public servant has to be established beyond reasonable doubt – Mere possession or recovery of currency notes is ....
When clouds of doubt arises on the part of the prosecution, the benefit of doubt is always accrued on the part of the accused alone, which is the cardinal principle of criminal justice delivery syste....
Establishment of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification is crucial for conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act, leading to a rebuttable presumption of guilt regarding the motive beh....
Proof of demand for illegal gratification is essential to establish offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act; mere recovery of money is insufficient.
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
