https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311888 Demand and acceptance of illegal gratification must be proved by reliable evidence to sustain conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The HC found that the complainant's account of repeated telephone demands was unsupported by the complaint and other witnesses, and the call-detail material did not reliably establish demand by the accused. It also noted that the cheque amounts had already been issued and encashed before the complaint and trap, leaving no pending official work on the relevant dates. Mere recovery of tainted money and phenolphthalein test results were therefore insufficient, and the conviction under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) was set aside. en-us Tue, 11 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 18 Jan 2024 22:02:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311888 Demand and acceptance of illegal gratification must be proved by reliable evidence to sustain conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The HC found that the complainant's account of repeated telephone demands was unsupported by the complaint and other witnesses, and the call-detail material did not reliably establish demand by the accused. It also noted that the cheque amounts had already been issued and encashed before the complaint and trap, leaving no pending official work on the relevant dates. Mere recovery of tainted money and phenolphthalein test results were therefore insufficient, and the conviction under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) was set aside. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 11 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311888