https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283615 Proof of demand of illegal gratification is an indispensable element for offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Where the complainant does not support the prosecution on demand and the panch witness gives no specific evidence of such demand, conviction cannot rest on recovery of tainted currency alone or on a positive phenolphthalein test. The Court further noted that alleged contradictions in the complainant's earlier statement were not proved in the manner required by law, and that hostile testimony can be relied on only to the extent it remains trustworthy and is corroborated by independent evidence. On these facts, the prosecution failed to establish demand and the conviction could not stand. en-us Wed, 06 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 Oct 2019 13:00:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283615 Proof of demand of illegal gratification is an indispensable element for offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Where the complainant does not support the prosecution on demand and the panch witness gives no specific evidence of such demand, conviction cannot rest on recovery of tainted currency alone or on a positive phenolphthalein test. The Court further noted that alleged contradictions in the complainant's earlier statement were not proved in the manner required by law, and that hostile testimony can be relied on only to the extent it remains trustworthy and is corroborated by independent evidence. On these facts, the prosecution failed to establish demand and the conviction could not stand. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 06 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283615