Back
K. SURENDER
State of A. P. , thru ACB, Hyderabad – Appellant
Versus
Mohd. Mazhar Baba – Respondent
JUDGMENT:
The State filed the appeal aggrieved by the acquittal of the respondent/Accused Officer (public servant). Accused was investigated and charge sheeted for the offence under Section 7 & 13(1)(d)r/w.13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
2. Briefly, the case of the ACB against the respondent/accused officer is that he was working as Panchayath Secretary. The defacto complainant was examined as PW.1 who was an agriculturist and also taking up small contracts. During 2003- 2004, PW.1 took up contract work of constructing side drains and water tubs at S.C.Colony of Nagireddypally under SGRY scheme. Having completed the work, the department had to pay some amount and also rice to PW.1. PW.1 informed the Assistant Executive Engineer-PW.3 about the completion of work. Then PW.3 went to the place where the work was undertaken and entered in the M-Book and also issued coupons for 16 Quintals of rice. PW.1 thereafter met PW.5 who was the MRO. PW.5 instructed PW.1 to meet the accused.
3. On 26.04.2004, PW.1 met accused and handed over the rice coupons of 16 quintals and requested him to issue the rice for which the accused allegedly demanded Rs.3,000/- as bribe. Several times PW.1 me
The prosecution must prove both the demand for a bribe and the existence of an official favor pending; mere recovery of tainted currency is insufficient for conviction.
The prosecution must prove the demands and acceptance of a bribe to establish guilt under the P.C. Act.
The prosecution must prove the demand for bribe beyond reasonable doubt; failure to do so results in acquittal.
The presumption under Section 20 of the Prevention of Corruption Act (P.C. Act) can only be drawn if the prosecution proves the foundational facts, such as demand and acceptance of bribe. In the abse....
Demand and acceptance of bribe are essential ingredients of the offences under Sections 7 and 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Mere recovery of tainted amount in the abse....
The absence of foundational evidence regarding demand and acceptance of a bribe justifies the acquittal of the accused.
The prosecution must prove the demand and acceptance of the bribe, but once gratification is found to have been accepted, a legal presumption can be drawn that the amount was accepted as illegal grat....
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
