https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200329 Sanction for prosecution was valid because the competent authority considered the material facts, witness statements, FIR and relevant records before granting approval, and no particular form was required so long as satisfaction was shown. The corruption conviction was sustained because the complainant and trap witness consistently proved demand and acceptance of illegal gratification, corroborated by recovery of tainted currency and a positive phenolphthalein test. Concurrent findings of the lower courts on credibility and guilt were upheld, leaving the conviction and sentence undisturbed. en-us Wed, 15 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 26 Mar 2018 11:48:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200329 Sanction for prosecution was valid because the competent authority considered the material facts, witness statements, FIR and relevant records before granting approval, and no particular form was required so long as satisfaction was shown. The corruption conviction was sustained because the complainant and trap witness consistently proved demand and acceptance of illegal gratification, corroborated by recovery of tainted currency and a positive phenolphthalein test. Concurrent findings of the lower courts on credibility and guilt were upheld, leaving the conviction and sentence undisturbed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 15 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200329