bribe

presumption under Sec. 20 PCA
Case BriefsSupreme Court

“But, when the fact of receipt of payment or an agreement to receive the gratification stands proved, there is a clear case of nexus or corroboration and the presumption itself is irrelevant. Section 20 gets attracted when it is proved that the public servant has accepted or agreed to accept any gratification other than legal remuneration and, in that case, presumption is that it is the motive or reward for any of the acts covered under Section 7, 11 or 13(1)(b) of the Act.”

Punjab and Haryana High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The appellant has himself unequivocally admitted during his cross-examination before the Trial Court that the cheque amount was paid as a bribe to the respondent for securing Government employment in the Punjab Police by certain job aspirants.

Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“In criminal trials certificate in terms of Section 65-B of the Act is to filed before commencement of the trial. However, the Trial Court, in its discretion, after examining any application by the prosecution under Sections 91 or 311 CrPC or Section 165 of the Evidence, may permit production of such certificate at any stage of the trial if no irreversible prejudice is caused to the accused”

Madras High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“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”.

Case BriefsSupreme CourtSupreme Court (Constitution/Larger Benches)

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.