Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A.BADHARUDEEN
B.J. Sreedhar, Deputy Director, Mines Safety Ministry Of Labour – Appellant
Versus
CBI/SPE, KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. evidence of bribery demands corroboration from direct witnesses or material substantiation. (Para 3 , 6 , 21) |
| 2. trial for distinct corruption charges is permissible if they do not constitute the same offence. (Para 4 , 5 , 10 , 22) |
| 3. lack of recovery evidence undermines the prosecution's claims of habitual bribery. (Para 7 , 11 , 16 , 19) |
JUDGMENT :
1. In this appeal, the sole accused in C.C.No.5/2005 on the files of the Special Judge (SPE/CBI)-I, Ernakulam challenges the conviction and sentence imposed against him as per judgment dated 13.05.2011 in the above case. CBI is the 1st respondent and the State of Kerala represented by the Public Prosecutor is the 2nd respondent.
3. This case, emanated from the FIR registered as R.C.No.17(4)/2004/CBI/KER dated 16.07.2004, by the CBI alleging commission of offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (`P.C Act, 1988’ for short), by the accused. Thereafter final report was filed and based on the final report, C.C.No.5/2005 was registered against the accused alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 7 , 13(1)(a) and 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of the P.C Act, 1988 by him. Precisely the
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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
