https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299213 Consistent evidence from the complainant and panch witness established demand and acceptance of illegal gratification, the placing of the money in the accused's hip pocket, the signing of the bail bond register, and a successful phenolphthalein trap. The defence that the money was thrust into the pocket was unsupported and abandoned. On these facts, the statutory presumption under Section 20 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 remained unrebutted, and the High Court was justified in reversing the acquittal and sustaining the conviction. en-us Mon, 13 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Dec 2021 20:58:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299213 Consistent evidence from the complainant and panch witness established demand and acceptance of illegal gratification, the placing of the money in the accused's hip pocket, the signing of the bail bond register, and a successful phenolphthalein trap. The defence that the money was thrust into the pocket was unsupported and abandoned. On these facts, the statutory presumption under Section 20 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 remained unrebutted, and the High Court was justified in reversing the acquittal and sustaining the conviction. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 13 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299213