https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311919 The SC allowed the appeal and acquitted the accused of charges under Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The prosecution failed to prove illegal gratification as the complainant disowned his initial complaint statement and no other evidence established demand by the accused. The HC incorrectly held the demand as proved. Mere possession and recovery of currency notes without proof of demand cannot establish the offence. The conviction and sentence were set aside. en-us Wed, 24 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 21 Jan 2024 20:39:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311919 The SC allowed the appeal and acquitted the accused of charges under Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The prosecution failed to prove illegal gratification as the complainant disowned his initial complaint statement and no other evidence established demand by the accused. The HC incorrectly held the demand as proved. Mere possession and recovery of currency notes without proof of demand cannot establish the offence. The conviction and sentence were set aside. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 24 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311919