https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311939 Corroborated evidence of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification, including trap proceedings, recovery of tainted currency notes, panchnama and documentary record, sustained the conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The complainant's later departure in cross-examination did not discredit the earlier consistent evidence establishing demand and acceptance. Once acceptance of gratification was proved, the presumption under Section 20(1) operated, and the accused failed to rebut it. The High Court's reversal of acquittal was found not to raise two reasonably possible views, so interference was unwarranted. The conviction and sentence under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) were upheld. en-us Fri, 13 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 23 Jan 2024 20:11:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311939 Corroborated evidence of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification, including trap proceedings, recovery of tainted currency notes, panchnama and documentary record, sustained the conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The complainant's later departure in cross-examination did not discredit the earlier consistent evidence establishing demand and acceptance. Once acceptance of gratification was proved, the presumption under Section 20(1) operated, and the accused failed to rebut it. The High Court's reversal of acquittal was found not to raise two reasonably possible views, so interference was unwarranted. The conviction and sentence under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) were upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 13 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311939