Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 12 (0.21 seconds)Section 13 in The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Gurcharan Singh vs State Of Haryana on 13 September, 1972
(3) Gurcharan Singh vs. State of Haryana 1993(3) RCR
(Criminal),450 ;
Man Singh vs Delhi Administration on 6 April, 1979
(8) Man Singh vs. Delhi Administration AIR 1979 Supreme
Court 1455
(9) Ram Narain Yadav vs. State of U.P.1990 Crl.L.J. 973.
Section 161 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 313 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
C.M.Girish Babu vs Cbi, Cochin, High Court Of Kerala on 24 February, 2009
as (PW-10) coupled with hand wash and wallet wash only prove the
recovery of the tainted currency notes from the accused but in view of
C.M.Girish Babu's case (supra) mere recovery is not sufficient to convict
the accused under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Act.
The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988
Amrik Singh vs State Of Punjab on 4 February, 1993
In authority Amrik Singh's case (supra) where the shadow
witness and complainant were related to each other and that fact has been
suppressed by the prosecution, in that case, it was held that serious doubt
has been caused as to the veracity of the prosecution case.
Kaptan @ Hari Kishan And Ors. vs State Of Haryana on 1 July, 2005
In authority Hari Kishana's case (supra) where the demand
acceptance was not proved by independent evidence, the accused was
acquitted.