https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792452 In a corruption prosecution, proof of demand and voluntary acceptance of illegal gratification was essential, and mere recovery of money was insufficient without reliable foundational evidence. The prosecution evidence was found untrustworthy, material witnesses did not support the case, and no satisfactory material established a criminal conspiracy or the prerequisites for invoking the statutory presumption. Withholding the alleged tape-recorded conversation, treated as the best evidence on demand and identity, justified an adverse inference. The High Court's acquittal was a plausible view based on a fresh appraisal of evidence, so appellate interference was not warranted and the acquittal was affirmed. en-us Wed, 27 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 May 2026 10:38:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792452 In a corruption prosecution, proof of demand and voluntary acceptance of illegal gratification was essential, and mere recovery of money was insufficient without reliable foundational evidence. The prosecution evidence was found untrustworthy, material witnesses did not support the case, and no satisfactory material established a criminal conspiracy or the prerequisites for invoking the statutory presumption. Withholding the alleged tape-recorded conversation, treated as the best evidence on demand and identity, justified an adverse inference. The High Court's acquittal was a plausible view based on a fresh appraisal of evidence, so appellate interference was not warranted and the acquittal was affirmed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 27 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792452