https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290166 Conviction under Section 165A IPC was found unsustainable because the prosecution evidence rested only on the complainant-police officer and other police personnel, with no independent witness to the alleged bribe offer or seizure of currency notes. The complainant also lodged the FIR and investigated the case, undermining credibility. The seizure memo failed to explain the surrounding circumstances, and available respectable witnesses were not joined. A permit covering the transport of gram, though apparently expired by a day, made the defence version plausible and weakened the inference of a deliberate bribe attempt. The cumulative effect was substantial doubt, entitling the accused to acquittal. en-us Thu, 14 Aug 1975 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 11 Sep 2020 15:37:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290166 Conviction under Section 165A IPC was found unsustainable because the prosecution evidence rested only on the complainant-police officer and other police personnel, with no independent witness to the alleged bribe offer or seizure of currency notes. The complainant also lodged the FIR and investigated the case, undermining credibility. The seizure memo failed to explain the surrounding circumstances, and available respectable witnesses were not joined. A permit covering the transport of gram, though apparently expired by a day, made the defence version plausible and weakened the inference of a deliberate bribe attempt. The cumulative effect was substantial doubt, entitling the accused to acquittal. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 14 Aug 1975 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290166