https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312120 In a corruption prosecution, demand and acceptance of illegal gratification had to be proved as foundational facts before the statutory presumption could arise. The complainant turned hostile and denied any demand or payment, the supporting witnesses gave no direct proof of demand, the audio recording was unclear, and the tainted money was recovered from a table drawer rather than from the accused. Those circumstances left the defence explanation unrebutted and created reasonable doubt. The conviction was therefore not sustainable and acquittal followed. en-us Fri, 28 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 01 Feb 2024 18:25:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312120 In a corruption prosecution, demand and acceptance of illegal gratification had to be proved as foundational facts before the statutory presumption could arise. The complainant turned hostile and denied any demand or payment, the supporting witnesses gave no direct proof of demand, the audio recording was unclear, and the tainted money was recovered from a table drawer rather than from the accused. Those circumstances left the defence explanation unrebutted and created reasonable doubt. The conviction was therefore not sustainable and acquittal followed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 28 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312120