Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.24 seconds)Section 7 in The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Section 13 in The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
The Right to Information Act, 2005
G.V. Nanjundiah vs State (Delhi Administration) on 12 August, 1987
39 The appreciation of evidence as done by the learned
Special Judge is not proper. He has proceeded as if the appellant
was already guilty and put a reverse burden of proving his
innocence on the appellant. In this case, panch Sarolkar (PW 2)
had previously also acted as a panch in trap cases on two
occasions. Thus, he was acquainted with the police officers. His
evidence, therefore, needed to be appreciated cautiously by taking
this into consideration, but the Special Judge has accepted his
evidence as true and reliable by holding him to be a respectable
person only by virtue of his 'being a public servant'. That, the
panch had acted twice previously as such, was pointed out
to the learned Judge. The decision of the Supreme Court of
::: Uploaded on - 28/04/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 29/04/2016 00:00:19 :::
Tilak 33/34 APPEAL-210-11(J)
India, in the case of G.V.Nanjundiah Vs. State (Delhi
Administration) (supra) was also pointed out to him, but he tried
to wriggle out of it by referring to a decision delivered by the
Bombay High Court. What he further observed is indeed
shocking. He observed : In the present case, "there should not be
any doubt that the panch witness is a respectable person being a
public servant". All that can be said about these observations is
that by the present logic, the appellant also should be held as a
respectable person 'being a public servant', (and therefore, not
likely to take bribe).
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Section 19 in The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
B.Jayaraj vs State Of A.P on 28 March, 2014
concerned, it is a settled position in law that
demand of illegal gratification is sine qua non to
constitute the said offence and mere recovery of
currency notes cannot constitute the offence
under Section 7 unless it is proved beyond all
reasonable doubt that the accused voluntarily
accepted the money knowing it to be a bribe. The
above position has been succinctly laid down in
several judgments of this Court.
The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988
Section 3 in The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
1