https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281717 In prosecutions under the Prevention of Corruption Act, proof of demand of illegal gratification is indispensable, and mere recovery of tainted currency does not by itself establish guilt or activate the Section 20 presumption. The evidence here was found unreliable because the alleged earlier payment was vague and uncorroborated, the supporting witness was not examined, and the trap evidence contained material inconsistencies on the place and manner of the transaction. On that basis, the conviction and sentence were held unsustainable and were set aside. en-us Fri, 14 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Jul 2019 09:59:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281717 In prosecutions under the Prevention of Corruption Act, proof of demand of illegal gratification is indispensable, and mere recovery of tainted currency does not by itself establish guilt or activate the Section 20 presumption. The evidence here was found unreliable because the alleged earlier payment was vague and uncorroborated, the supporting witness was not examined, and the trap evidence contained material inconsistencies on the place and manner of the transaction. On that basis, the conviction and sentence were held unsustainable and were set aside. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 14 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281717