Filter by Date
Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

M/S HCL INFOSYSTEM LTD Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

Appeal (Crl.), 751 of 2016, Judgment Date: Aug 09, 2016

The question for consideration relates to the jurisdiction of the Special Judge appointed under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (the “PC Act”) to try a person other than a public servant if the public servant dies before the commencement of the trial. Further question is whether the Special Judge can try a non PC Act case when his appointment is to try all cases of the Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

MUKHTIAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB - PC Act

Appeal (Crl.), 618 of 2012, Judgment Date: Jul 05, 2016

It is a settled principle of law laid down by this Court in a number of decisions that once the demand and voluntary acceptance of illegal gratification knowing it to be the bribe are proved by evidence then conviction must follow under Section 7 of the PC Act against the accused. Indeed, these twin requirements are sine qua non for proving Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

STATE OF KERALA Vs. P. MUHAMMED NOUSHAD - PC Act

Appeal (Crl.), 736 of 2008, Judgment Date: Jun 29, 2016

16) It is a settled principle of law that if the view taken by the High Court while reversing the judgment of the Trial Court appears to be just and reasonable and which is supported by cogent reasoning then this Court would not re-appreciate the evidence again especially when the appeal arises out of the order of acquittal. 17) It is only when the Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

A. SIVAPRAKASH Vs. STATE OF KERALA

Appeal (Crl.), 131 of 2007, Judgment Date: May 10, 2016

Insofar as sub-clause (ii) is concerned, it stipulates that a public servant is said to commit the offence of criminal misconduct if he, by abusing his position as a public servant, obtains for himself or for any other person any valuable thing or pecuniary advantage. Thus, the ingredients which will be required to be proved are: (1) The public servant has abused his position. (2) By abusing that Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

V.SEJAPPA Vs. STATE BY POLICE INSP.LOKAYUKTA

Appeal (Crl.), 747 of 2008, Judgment Date: Apr 12, 2016

Full Judgment

Tags PC Act
Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

DEEPAK SURANA AND ORS Vs. STATE OF M.P

Appeal (Crl.), 128 of 2016, Judgment Date: Feb 08, 2016

The agreements in question were not even recovered from the custody of the appellants and were recovered from the vendors themselves. The agreements being unilateral and not bearing the signatures of the appellants, mere execution of such agreements cannot be considered as a relevant circumstance against the appellants. There is nothing on record to indicate that the consideration mentioned in the agreement could be traced Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

C.B.I.,BANK SECURITIES & FRAUD CELL Vs. RAMESH GELLI & OR

Appeal (Crl.), 1077-1081 of 2013, Judgment Date: Feb 04, 2016

While there can be no manner of doubt that in the Objects and Reasons stated for enactment of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 it has been made more than clear that the Act, inter alia, envisages widening of the scope of the definition of public servant, nevertheless, the mere performance of public duties by the holder of any office cannot bring the incumbent Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

KRISHAN CHANDER Vs. STATE OF DELHI

Appeal (Crl.), 14 of 2016, Judgment Date: Jan 06, 2016

it is clear that the High Court has recorded the concurrent findings on the charges framed against the Appellant in the impugned judgment and order. It has also failed to re-appreciate the evidence on record properly and consider the law on the relevant aspect of the case. Therefore, the said findings are not only erroneous in law but also suffer from error in law. Hence, the same is Full Judgment

Chhatisgarh High Court (Single Judge)

Ramlal Sharma V/s State of Chhattisgarh Through-Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, & Ors.

WPS->WRIT PETITON SERVICE MATTER, 352 of 2014, Judgment Date: Nov 27, 2015

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

M/S SHREE BHAGWATI STEEL ROLLING MILLS Vs. COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE & ANR.

Appeal (Civil), 4280 of 2007, Judgment Date: Nov 24, 2015

Full Judgment

Tags PC Act
Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

PROF. N.K.GANGULY Vs. CBI NEW DELHI

SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE, 798 of 2015, Judgment Date: Nov 18, 2015

“....Whether sanction is to be accorded or not, is a matter for the Government to consider. The absolute power to accord or withhold sanction on the Government is irrelevant and foreign to the duty cast on that Court which is the ascertainment of the true nature of the act.” “It is clear that the first part of Section 197(1) provides a special protection, inter Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

RAM LAKHAN SINGH Vs. STATE GOVT. OF U P

Writ Petition (Civil), 933 of 2014, Judgment Date: Nov 17, 2015

A public servant in a democracy should be a guardian of morals. He is entrusted with higher responsibilities of a public office and they contribute their best for the just and humane society. We feel that for effective functioning of a democracy, the role of Executive is very important. Civil servants and public officials are expected Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

N.SUNKANNA Vs. STATE OF A.P.

Appeal (Crl.), 1355 of 2015, Judgment Date: Oct 14, 2015

The prosecution has not examined any other witness present at the time when the money was demanded by the accused and also when the money was allegedly handed-over to the accused by the complainant. The complainant himself had disowned his complaint and has turned hostile and there is no other evidence to prove that the accused had made any demand. In short there is no Full Judgment

Delhi High Court (Single Judge)

REKHA RANI Vs CBI THROUGH ITS STANDING COUNSEL

CRL.M.C., 4402 of 2014, Judgment Date: Oct 05, 2015

Full Judgment

Tags PC Act
Chhatisgarh High Court (Single Judge)

Pappu Singh Rajput Vs State Of Chhattisgarh Through: Superintendent of Police, Anti Corruption Bureau, Raipur (C.G.)

CRR->CRIMINAL REVISION, 208 of 2015, Judgment Date: Oct 05, 2015

Full Judgment

Tags PC Act
Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

SUDHIR Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

Appeal (Crl.), 1286-1287 of 2015, Judgment Date: Oct 01, 2015

Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, and after considering the gravity of the offence, circumstances of the case, particularly, the allegations of corruption and misappropriation of public funds released for rural development, and further considering the conduct of the appellants and the fact that the investigation is held up as the custodial interrogation of the appellants could not be done due to Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Full Bench (FB)- Three Judge)

ESSAR TELEHOLDINGS LTD Vs. CBI

Appeal (Crl.), 1273 of 2015, Judgment Date: Sep 29, 2015

In the end I may add that it is not obligatory on the Court to hold a joint trial and provisions of these sections are only enabling provisions. An accused cannot insist with ulterior purpose or otherwise that he be tried as co-accused with other accused, that too in a different case. It is only a discretionary power and Court may Full Judgment

Tags Corruption
Delhi High Court (Single Judge)

P S SHETTY Vs CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

W.P.(CRL), 1380 of 2013, Judgment Date: Sep 29, 2015

Full Judgment

Chhatisgarh High Court (Single Judge)

Dilip Kumar Das Vs Central Bureau of Investigation (ACB), Chhattisgarh, Bhilai, Distt. Durg (C.G.), Civil & Revenue Distt. Durg (C.G.)

CRR->CRIMINAL REVISION, 186 of 2014, Judgment Date: Sep 23, 2015

Full Judgment

Delhi High Court (Single Judge)

RANDHIR SINGH versus C.B.I.

CRL.A., 15 of 2000, Judgment Date: Sep 21, 2015

Full Judgment