http://JUDIS.NIC.IN

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Page 1 of 19

PETITIONER:

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Vs.

RESPONDENT:

NARSINGRAO GANGARAM PIMPLE

DATE OF JUDGMENT27/10/1984

BENCH:

FAZALALI, SYED MURTAZA

BENCH:

FAZALALI, SYED MURTAZA

THAKKAR, M.P. (J)

CITATION:

1984 AIR 63 1984 SCC (1) 446

1983 SCALE (2)659

CITATOR INFO :

R 1987 SC1986 (34)

ACT:

Prevention of Corruption Act-S. 5(1) (a) and 5(2) and

s. 161 of I.P.C.- Accused prosecuted for demanding and

accepting illegal gratification-Trial Court convicted and

sentenced the accused-High Court acquitted the accused-

Whether and when Supreme Court should interfere. What should

be judicial approach to evidence of witnesses in a trap

case.

HEADNOTE:

The respondent, a Sub-Inspector of Police, was charged

under s. 161 of the Indian Penal Code and also under ss.

5(1) (a) and 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The

prosecution case was that one Rege had filed a complaint

against his tenant Walawalker, that he was running a

distillary. On a search of Walawalker’s house made by P.W. 8

Gangurde, a police officer subordinate to the respondent, no

trace of distillar