Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“High standard of proof is essential to convict an accused in a criminal trial. However, no such strict proof is required for punishing a public servant under the Discipline and Appeal Rules”.
In P.V. Narasimha Rao v. State (CBI/SPE), (1998) 4 SCC 626, the 5-Jugdge Bench held that the MPs and MLAs enjoyed immunity if they cast vote in the House after taking bribe for it.
“In the cases in which an office bearer or an officer is caught red handed and is being proceeded under Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, there is no scope of taking a lenient view.”
“The Investigating Officer becomes functus officio when charge sheet is filed after investigation, unless there will be further investigation under Section 173(8) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.”
The petitioner allegedly took bribe to clear bills of the complainant
Rajasthan High Court stated that the prosecution had failed to prove the demand and acceptance of the bribe by the appellant and mere recovery of money could not be a grounds to consider it as a bribe.
“When the daughter belonging to the non-tribal is entitled to the equal share in the property of the father, there is no
The Constitution Bench of SA Nazeer, BR Gavai, AS Bopanna, V Ramasubramanian and BV Nagarathna, JJ has observed that the trial does not abate nor does it result in an order of acquittal of the accused public servant if the complainant turns ‘hostile’, or has died or is unavailable to let in his evidence.
Supreme Court: In a case wherein the appeal challenged the final judgment and order passed by the High Court of
Punjab and Haryana High Court: While dealing with a corruption case, Lisa Gill, J., allowed the bail petition preferred by the petitioner
Rouse Avenue Court, New Delhi: While granting bail to the applicant Pramond Kumar Bhasin, Ajay Gulati, J. observed that the charge sheet
Supreme Court: In a highly controversial extortion case of about Rs. 200 crores in Delhi’s Tihar jail, the 3-judge Bench of Uday
The IBBI Disciplinary Committee has issued an ex-parte interim order due to the urgency of the matter and suspended the registration of
Supreme Court: In an interesting case where the Division Bench of Sanjay Kishan Kaul* and M.M. Sundresh, JJ., was to answer whether
“The purpose of a disciplinary proceeding by an employer is to enquire into an allegation of misconduct by an employee which results in a violation of the service rules governing the relationship of employment.”
112 significant Reports from 22 High Courts Allahabad High Court Right to Reputation People using cyberspace to vent out anger and
Madras High Court: The Division Bench of K. Kalyanasundaram and R. Hemalatha, JJ., expressed that, the Government advocate being the representative of
Supreme Court: In an interesting case relating to corruption, the Division Bench of Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka*, JJ., acquitted a
Supreme Court: While dealing with a case of abetment and conspiracy for commission of criminal misconduct by public servant, the Division Bench