https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186402 A public sanction order for prosecution may be proved by producing the original order issued by the competent authority and proving the authenticating signature; proof is not confined to the mode assumed by the High Court, and the unobjected exhibit was admissible. In a corruption prosecution, interference with acquittal is unwarranted where the evidence contains inconsistencies and improbabilities and the High Court's view is a plausible one on the record. Applying the settled rule that an appellate court should not disturb an acquittal when two reasonable views are possible, the conviction was not restored and the acquittal stood. en-us Fri, 07 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Apr 2024 12:22:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186402 A public sanction order for prosecution may be proved by producing the original order issued by the competent authority and proving the authenticating signature; proof is not confined to the mode assumed by the High Court, and the unobjected exhibit was admissible. In a corruption prosecution, interference with acquittal is unwarranted where the evidence contains inconsistencies and improbabilities and the High Court's view is a plausible one on the record. Applying the settled rule that an appellate court should not disturb an acquittal when two reasonable views are possible, the conviction was not restored and the acquittal stood. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 07 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186402