<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2017 (10) TMI 143 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348988</link>
    <description>Discharge under the Code of Criminal Procedure is unavailable where prosecution material creates a ground to presume commission of an offence; disputed factual explanations must be tested at trial. Material indicating an unrecorded official order, the petitioner&#039;s chamber as the transaction location, complaint allegations, recovery record, voice material and witness statements supported a prima facie inference of demand, receipt or agreement to obtain illegal gratification and conspiracy. A public servant need not have narrowly defined pending work where gratification is allegedly accepted as a motive or reward for an official act. A private person may be liable for accepting or attempting to obtain gratification for another person. The prosecution was permitted to proceed to trial.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Oct 2017 09:43:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=491429" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (10) TMI 143 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348988</link>
      <description>Discharge under the Code of Criminal Procedure is unavailable where prosecution material creates a ground to presume commission of an offence; disputed factual explanations must be tested at trial. Material indicating an unrecorded official order, the petitioner&#039;s chamber as the transaction location, complaint allegations, recovery record, voice material and witness statements supported a prima facie inference of demand, receipt or agreement to obtain illegal gratification and conspiracy. A public servant need not have narrowly defined pending work where gratification is allegedly accepted as a motive or reward for an official act. A private person may be liable for accepting or attempting to obtain gratification for another person. The prosecution was permitted to proceed to trial.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348988</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>