Back
Next 
Court Decision
2024-09-10
Subject: Criminal Law - Corruption
In a significant ruling, the Special Judge of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in Pune has discharged Dr.
The defense argued that both accused followed proper procedures during the procurement process and that the decisions made were approved by the IITM Director and various committees. They emphasized that there was no evidence of personal gain or wrongdoing on their part. Furthermore, they pointed out that a disciplinary inquiry against
Conversely, the prosecution maintained that the accused had deliberately diluted procurement criteria to favor a specific supplier, M/s. Video Walls, which allegedly provided substandard products at inflated prices. The CBI argued that the evidence collected indicated a clear case of conspiracy and corruption.
The court meticulously examined the evidence presented by both sides. It noted that the procurement process involved multiple committees, and the decisions made were collectively approved. The judge highlighted that the prosecution failed to establish a direct link between the accused and any financial gain from the alleged irregularities.
The judge also pointed out that the allegations of substandard quality were based on tests conducted years after the installation of the displays, which did not reflect the condition of the equipment at the time of procurement.
Ultimately, the court ruled in favor of the applicants, stating that the continuation of the prosecution would be an abuse of process given the lack of substantial evidence against them. Both Dr.
Court Rejects Selective Arbitration Under Section 21
12 Feb 2026
Family Judge Exposes Weaponized Litigation in Custody Dispute
14 Feb 2026
Centre Notifies Two High Court Chief Justice Appointments
16 Feb 2026
Deep Chandra Joshi Appointed Acting NCLT President
16 Feb 2026
Debunking the Myth That Indians Lack Privacy Concepts
16 Feb 2026
Whose View Is It Anyway? Juniors Uncredited
16 Feb 2026
Private Property Disputes Not Human Rights Violations; HRC Lacks Jurisdiction Under PHRA: Gujarat HC
16 Feb 2026
Supreme Court Rejects Stay on RTI Data Amendments
16 Feb 2026
Non-Compliance of Section 4 Shariat Act Bars Muslim Declarations Under Section 3: Supreme Court Impleads Centre, UP
16 Feb 2026
The court ruled that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case against public servants accused of corruption, leading to their discharge, emphasizing the higher threshold for criminal li....
The court held that defects in sanction do not invalidate prosecution under the Prevention of Corruption Act, and the existence of conspiracy must be evaluated during trial.
The court emphasized that at the charge framing stage, the trial court must evaluate prosecution materials as true without considering the defense, and prosecution sanction is necessary for certain c....
![S.K. MAHABOOB [DIED] AND ANOTHER vs THE STATE OF AP REP BY ITS SPL. PP HYD. FOR ACB. - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 73055](https://supremetoday-s3.b-cdn.net/Telangana_1.png)
Mere procedural irregularities in public office do not constitute criminal misconduct without proof of dishonest intention or misappropriation of funds.
The absence of evidence proving demand and acceptance of a bribe is critical for conviction under corruption laws.
Accused in corruption case failed to demonstrate grounds for discharge; sufficient evidence warranted trial regarding conspiracy and fraud in loan sanctioning.
A valid sanction under the Prevention of Corruption Act is necessary, but acquittal cannot occur without addressing all merits of the case.
The appellate court cannot reverse an acquittal unless the trial court's findings are clearly based on illegality or incorrect consideration of evidence.
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
