Posts

Showing posts with the label Prevention of Corruption

Must Read

Gulshan Prakash v. State of Haryana (2010) 1 SCC477

By
Image
Gulshan Prakash v. State of Haryana (2010) 1 SCC 477||Case Summary  Introduction  In this appeal, the Court has interpreted Article 15(4) of the Fundamental Right. It has been added by the 1st Amendment Act, of 1951. Facts The State of Haryana instructed Maharshi Dayanand University (MDU), Rohtak to conduct entrance examination for MD/MS/PG courses for the Session 2008-2009. The appellant made a representation to the Health Secretary for providing reservation for SC and ST in the Post Graduate courses, Since there was no response from the Health Secretary the Appellant filed a petition in the High Court.  The High Court dismissed the petition of the appellant therefore the appellant approached the Supreme Court by Special Leave Petition under Article 136. Appellant Contentions  MDU, Rohtak has provided 20% reservation for the graduate level courses or undergraduate courses therefore the said University should also provide reservation in for the PG courses.  The Government o
Post a Comment
Read more

Abhay Singh Chautala v. C.B.I (2011) 7 SCC 141

By
Image
 Abhay Singh Chautala vs. C.B.I Hon'ble Judges/Coram: V.S. Sirpurkar and T.S. Thakur, JJ. Introduction  A very interesting and famous case under the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988, where several charges under the Act were made on a political person who had represented various constituencies in the Lok Sabha and Legislative Assembly of States. The objection raised here by the appellants were over the previous sanction required by the Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 before taking cognizance of offence by the court. Facts On the order of a Writ Petition No. 93 of 2003, while investigating the JBT Teachers recruitment scam the CBI conducted searches and seized incriminating documents which revealed that Shri Om Prakash Chautala and his family had amassed wealth more than from his known sources of income. A regular FIR had been filed against Om Prakash Chautala and his family. It is found in the investigation that Abhay Singh Chautala and Ajay Singh Chautala had
Post a Comment
Read more

Kalicharan Mahapatra v. State of Orissa AIR 1998 SC 2595; (1998) 6 SCC 411

By
Image
 Kalicharan Mahapatra v. State of Orissa, AIR 1998  Criminal Appeal No. 261 of 2022 (Arising out of SLP (Criminal) No. 7182 of 2019) Facts A case was registered against the appellant, an IPS officer, under various sections of the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Later the appellant retired from the service but the investigation into the case continued. The chargesheet was filed after two years of his retirement. Therefore the appellant contended that a retired public servant isn't included in the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Issue Whether a retired public servant is included within the meaning of public servant under PCA and whether can he be prosecuted under S-19.PCA. Contentions- Unlike section 197 of CrPC, S-2(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, defining public servant, does not include the words "any person who is or was... a public servant", thus a person who ceased to be a Public Servant does not come within the ambit of Prevention of
Post a Comment
Read more

Kanwarjit Singh Kakkar v. State Of Punjab (2011) 13 SCC 158

By
Image
 Kanwarjit Singh Kakkar v. State Of Punjab (2011) In this case, the Court tries to find whether the private practice by a government doctor is within the ambit of  PCA.  Facts This appeal is filed under Article 136 of the Constitution, against the order of the HC that refused to quash the FIR registered under the Prevention of Corruption Act and IPC by the Vigilance Bureau. The FIR was registered under S.13(1)(d) read with S.13(2), on the statement of informant/Raman Kumar who alleged that the appellant-doctor was doing private practice and charged Rs 100 as a prescription fee, which was restricted by the government. Given the allegation, a trap was laid by the officials in connivance with the informant and a raid was conducted, and the appellant got caught red-handed.  Petition before HC The appellant filed a petition before the HC of Punjab and Haryana to quash the FIR. Contentions of the appellant before HC He made the prescription on plain paper, which was not even signed by him, j
Post a Comment
Read more

K. Santhamma V. State of Telangana

By
Image
 K. Santhamma V. State of Telangana Introduction The appellant filed an appeal against the order of the HC of Telangana which confirmed the findings of a Special Court that convicted the appellant for offences punishable under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with S.13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.  PW- Prosecution Witness  PW 1- Complainant 1- Supervisor of the Society. PW 2- Complainant 2- MD of the Society PW 3- Madhusudan - Godown in charge of the Society. PW 4- ACTO (Assistant Commercial Tax Officer) Appellant- CTO (Commercial Tax Officer) Facts of the Case The appellant was working as a Commercial Tax Officer. It was alleged by PW 1, Sharma (working as a supervisor in Farmers' Service Co-operative Society) that the appellant was demanding a bribe of Rs 3000 to issue an assessment order. The supervisor of the said society and its MD made a written complaint to ACB. A trap was laid to catch the appellant red-handed by giving tainted currency notes. But it was alle
Post a Comment
Read more