Back
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
VINAY JOSHI, J
The State of Maharashtra – Appellant
Versus
Ajay Ratansingh Parmar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. details of the bribery case and accused's acquittal. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments regarding invalid sanction and evidential inconsistencies. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. discussion on the demand for bribe and evidence reliability. (Para 8 , 10 , 11 , 13) |
| 4. court's reasoning on the significance of valid sanctions. (Para 9 , 12 , 14) |
| 5. final judgment on the appeal dismissal. (Para 16) |
ORAL JUDGMENT:
1. The challenge in this appeal is to the judgment and order dated 29th January, 2010 in ACB Special Case No. 50 / 2006 passed by the learned Special Judge, Greater Bombay, by which the Respondent (Orig. Accused) was acquitted for the ofence punishable under Sections 7 , 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption (for short “P.C.”) Act, 1988. The Court below acquitted the accused primarily on the ground of invalid sanction and improbability about the demand and acceptance of bribe amount.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case can be stated as under: The Respondent (Orgi. Accused) was serving as an Assistant Police Inspector with MIDC Police Station, Mumbai. There was no dispute that the accused was a public servant within the meaning of Section 2(c) of the P.C. Act. On
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
