https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122606 Conviction under Section 420 IPC and Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 could not be sustained where the only material was a public servant's recommendation for issue of an L2 licence for a later alleged fictitious premises. The HC found no proof of dishonest intention, pecuniary advantage, wrongful loss, or dishonest abuse of office beyond the testimony of a single witness. A mere lapse of caution or prudence in making the recommendation did not satisfy the ingredients of the offences. On the facts proved, the conduct was at most a matter for departmental action, not criminal prosecution. en-us Tue, 03 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 18:38:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122606 Conviction under Section 420 IPC and Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 could not be sustained where the only material was a public servant's recommendation for issue of an L2 licence for a later alleged fictitious premises. The HC found no proof of dishonest intention, pecuniary advantage, wrongful loss, or dishonest abuse of office beyond the testimony of a single witness. A mere lapse of caution or prudence in making the recommendation did not satisfy the ingredients of the offences. On the facts proved, the conduct was at most a matter for departmental action, not criminal prosecution. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 03 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122606