https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200327 Conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act was sustained because the evidence showed demand and acceptance of illegal gratification, including a written complaint, trap proceedings, recovery of bribe money, and surrounding circumstances supporting a continuing course of corrupt conduct. The sanction for prosecution was also upheld because the Court would not reappraise the adequacy of the material before the sanctioning authority, and the fact that some materials were later unproved did not invalidate the sanction. The appeal therefore failed, and the conviction and sentence were maintained. en-us Thu, 19 Oct 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 26 Mar 2018 11:41:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200327 Conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act was sustained because the evidence showed demand and acceptance of illegal gratification, including a written complaint, trap proceedings, recovery of bribe money, and surrounding circumstances supporting a continuing course of corrupt conduct. The sanction for prosecution was also upheld because the Court would not reappraise the adequacy of the material before the sanctioning authority, and the fact that some materials were later unproved did not invalidate the sanction. The appeal therefore failed, and the conviction and sentence were maintained. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 19 Oct 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200327