Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Section 7, 13(1)(d)(i), (ii) -- Illegal gratification - Demand and acceptance - Proof of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification by a public servant as a fact in issue by prosecution is a sine qua non in order to establish guilt of accused/public servant u/ss 7, 13(1)(d)(i), (ii) of the Act...........
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Section 7, 13(1)(d), 13(2) -- Illegal gratification - In the absence of evidence of the complainant (direct/primary, oral/documentary evidence) it is permissible to draw an inferential deduction of culpability/guilt of a public servant u/s 7 and S.13(1)(d) r/w S.13(2) of the Act based on other evidence adduced by the prosecution...........
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Section 7, 13(1)(d), 13(2) -- Illegal gratification - Law as to - Analysed...........
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Section 7, 13(1)(d)(i), 13(1)(d)(ii) -- Illegal gratification - Where complainant turns hostile or has died or is unavailable to let in his evidence during trial, demand of illegal gratification can be proved by letting in the evidence of any other witness who can again let in evidence, either orally or by documentary evidence or..........
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Section 7, 13(1)(d)(i), 13(1)(d)(ii) -- Illegal gratification - Demand and acceptance - In order to prove fact in issue i.e demand and acceptance of illegal gratification following aspects have to be borne in mind: (i) If there is an offer to pay bribe giver without there being any demand from public servant and latter simply accepts the..........
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Section 7, 13(1)(d)(i), 13(1)(d)(ii) -- Illegal gratification - Demand and acceptance - Proof of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification by a public servant as a fact in issue by prosecution is a sine qua non in order to establish guilt of accused/public servant u/ss 7, 13(1)(d)(i), (ii) of the Act...........
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Section 7, 13(1)(d), 13(2) -- Illegal gratification - In the absence of evidence of the complainant (direct/primary, oral/documentary evidence) it is permissible to draw an inferential deduction of culpability/guilt of a public servant u/s 7 and S.13(1)(d) r/w S.13(2) of the Act based on other evidence adduced by the prosecution...........
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Section 7, 13(1)(d), 13(2) -- Illegal gratification - Law as to - Analysed...........
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 300(2), Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Section 13(2), 13(1)(c), Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 409, 477A -- Double jeopardy - Accused earlier charged for offence u/ss 13(1)(c), 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act and Ss.409, 477-A IPC and was convicted in two cases and acquitted in one case - Present two cases arise out of..........
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Section 7, 13(1)(a), 13(2) -- Illegal gratification - Accused being Medical Officer demanded and accepted Rs.8200 from complainant for treatment of his wife and Rs.1100 from `S' for treatment of his father - Time gap between alleged payments made in 1993-94 and FIR registered in the year 1997 was taken into consideration by trial Court -..........
