Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 20 (0.44 seconds)Section 7 in The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Section 13 in The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Section 20 in The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988
The Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995
R.K.Anand vs Registrar,Delhi High Court on 29 July, 2009
13. Unlike US and certain other countries where a
sting operation is recognised as a legal method of law
enforcement, though in a limited manner as will be noticed
hereinafter, the same is not the position in India which
makes the issues arising in the present case somewhat
unique. A sting operation carried out in public interest
has had the approval of this Court in R.K.
Anand v. High Court of Delhi [(2009) 8 SCC 106:
Neeraj Dutta vs State(Govt.Of N.C.T.Of Delhi) on 15 December, 2022
(Emphasis supplied)
69
The Apex Court was clarifying the judgment rendered by the 5
Judge Bench in NEERAJ DUTTA v. STATE7 and the Apex Court
holds that the basic concept of demand and acceptance has not
been diluted and that is the soul of the offence under Section 7 of
the Act. If the facts obtaining in the case at hand, as narrated
above, are noticed on the bedrock of the provision and its
interpretation by the Apex Court in the aforesaid judgment, what
would unmistakably emerge is that there is ostensible lack of
demand of money, but the presence of alleged acceptance pervades
through the allegations against the petitioners particularly to that
officers working in the Commercial Tax Department.
Bhupinder Singh Patel vs Cbi [Alongwith Crl. Revision Petition ... on 30 May, 2008
In a later judgment, the Delhi High Court in the case of
BHUPINDER SINGH PATEL v. CBI4 has held as follows:-