Showing : 41-47 of 47 Results

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2005
Details
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 439, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Section 7, 13(1)(d), 13(2)-- Bail - Illegal gratification - Contention that recovered currency notes not sealed, no demand made by accused, number of currency notes recovered not tallying with the currency notes given in the memo prepared before trap - In the facts and circumstances of case, without expressing any opinion on..........
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 2005
Details
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Section 5(2), Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 161-- Illegal gratification - Amount of Rs.150/- found in shirt pocket of accused in a trap - Shirt was hanging on peg and accused was away from room - Phenolphthalein powder not used in the case - It is duty of officers of vigilance department to safeguard for protection of public servant against whom..........
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2005
Details
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 309(2)-- Petitioner arrested u/s 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act while accepting bribe in a trap case - Case diary of case not forwarded with charge-sheet - Case diary received on 7.1.2005 and Court took cognizance on 18.1.2005 - Petitioner not entitled to be released on ground of illegal detention...........
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 2004
Details
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, Section 5A-- Bribe - Complaint to SDM as to demand of bribe - SDM laid a trap and recovered bribe money from accused - Accused and money handed over to police for action - Not illegal - Cannot be said that SDM investigated the case which he was not competent to do - SDM had only discharged his duties as law..........
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2002
Details
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Section 7, 13(1)(d), 13(2), 20-- Sub Registrar - To get exchange deed of property registered gratification of Rs.1,500/- demanded - In a trap amount recovered - Phenolphthalein test conducted on both hands and pant pocket proved positive - PW 2 who paid amount in presence of PW 3 an Agricultural Officer, fully supported..........
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2002
Details
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Section 13(2)-- Corruption case - Trap witnesses - Not independent witnesses - In a case under the Prevention of Corruption Act witnesses of the trap are required to be corroborated by independent evidence...........
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 1997
Details
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, Section 5(2), Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 61-- Bribe - Evidence of the person from whom bribe taken must be scrutinised with great care - Two Panch witnesses, driver of vehicle of D.S.P. and the other who had appeared as a witness in one of two police cases, cannot be said not independent witnesses - S.P. who arranged trap had no interest..........

Showing : 41-47 of 47 Results