K. SURENDER
E. Rukumangada Reddy – Appellant
Versus
State of A. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
K. SURENDER, J.
1. Criminal Appeal No. 545 of 2012 is filed by A2 and Criminal Appeal No. 584 of 2012 is filed by A1. Both A1 and A2 were trapped by ACB for demand and acceptance of Rs.6,000/- from complainant/PW-1. They are convicted for the offence under Sections 7 and Section 13(2) r/w 13(1) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short ‘the Act’) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and one year respectively vide judgment in C.C.No. 4 of 2006 dated 15.06.2012 passed by the Principal Special Judge for SPE & ACB Cases, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. Aggrieved by the same, present appeals are filed.
2. Briefly, the case of the prosecution is that A1 was working as Assistant Pay and Accounts Officer and A2 was working as Superintendent in the office of Pay and Accounts Office (PAO), Tilak Road, Hyderabad. PW-1/defacto complainant was working as Honourary State Treasurer, Bharat Scouts and Guides, A.P.State Association, Hyderabad. The said Society gets annual grant in aid from the Director of School Education for meeting the expenditure including salaries and other activities. During the year 2005, there was two months delay for issu
B. Jayaraj v. State of A.P. (2014) 13 SCC 55
C.M. Girish Babu v. CBI, Cochin, High Court of Kerala
K. Shanthamma v. State of Telangana
Khaleel Ahmed v. State of Karnataka
Mohd. Iqbal Ahmed v. State of Andhra Pradesh
N. Vijayakumar v. State of Tamil Nadu
P. Satyanarayana Murthy v. DI Police
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.