https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299185 For conspiracy-linked corruption offences, the bar on cognizance under Section 196(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 depended on the punishment prescribed for the object offence, not the sentence ultimately imposed, so prior consent was unnecessary. The corruption provision was wide enough to cover indirect receipt of bribe money, and the statutory presumption was not lost because payment was routed through another person. A demand for money to return a document from official custody amounted to an offence under Section 161 IPC. The evidence also established the second appellant's knowing participation. Convictions were maintained, but the sentence was reduced in view of delay, age, and hardship. en-us Fri, 19 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Dec 2021 11:54:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299185 For conspiracy-linked corruption offences, the bar on cognizance under Section 196(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 depended on the punishment prescribed for the object offence, not the sentence ultimately imposed, so prior consent was unnecessary. The corruption provision was wide enough to cover indirect receipt of bribe money, and the statutory presumption was not lost because payment was routed through another person. A demand for money to return a document from official custody amounted to an offence under Section 161 IPC. The evidence also established the second appellant's knowing participation. Convictions were maintained, but the sentence was reduced in view of delay, age, and hardship. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 19 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299185