Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.20 seconds)The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988
Sadashiv Mahadeo Yavaluje & Gajanan ... vs The State Of Maharashtra on 6 December, 1989
Sadashiv Mahadeo Yavaluje and Gajanan
Shripatrao Salokhe vs. State of Maharashtra
reported in (1990) 1 SCC 299;
Satender Kumar Antil vs Central Bureau Of Investigation on 11 July, 2022
Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of
Investigation and Another reported in 2026
SCC OnLine SC 162;
Sudhir vs The State Of Maharashtra & Anr on 1 October, 2015
Sudhir vs. State of Maharashtra reported in
(2016) 1 SCC 146.
Panchal Karneshkumar Maheshbhai vs State Of Gujarat & 3 on 27 August, 2015
6. Heard learned APP Mr. Soaham Joshi on behalf of the
respondent-State, who has strongly objected this
Page 7 of 15
Uploaded by DIVYA PILLAI(HC00199) on Fri Mar 13 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Mar 14 06:13:23 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/4751/2026 ORDER DATED: 25/02/2026
undefined
application and submitted that, on the day of trap itself
there were exchange of phone calls between the original
complainant and the applicant. The transcripts of the
phone conversations between the applicant and the
original complainant have been mentioned in the affidavit
of the Investigating Officer, and the same transcripts also
form part of the panchnama, drawn by the Investigating
Officer. Hence, Mr. Joshi has urged the Court that, the
Court should not show any leniency towards the
applicant, who is a retired public servant and who has
committed offence under the Prevention of Corruption
Act. According to Mr. Joshi, the Prevention of Corruption
Act being special statute, the directions of the judgement
in the case of Arneshkumar (supra) are not required to
be followed.
Devender Kumar Bansal vs State Of Punjab And Others on 31 October, 2017
16. Thus, in the light of the facts of the present case and
the observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Devender Kumar Bansal (supra), this Court does not
find any mitigating reasons so as to exercise discretion in
favour of the applicant and accordingly this application is
hereby rejected.
1