Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

Kerala High Court Upholds Conviction of Village Officer for Accepting Bribe

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Kerala High Court has upheld the conviction of K.R. Muhammed Nazer, a former Village Officer, for accepting a bribe. The judgment was delivered by the Hon'ble Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath on June 16, 2023.

The case, Criminal Appeal No. 1692 of 2013, arose from an incident in 2006 when the appellant, while serving as a Village Officer in Wagamon Village, allegedly obtained ₹650/- as a bribe from a complainant in exchange for providing a location map. The Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Kottayam, had earlier convicted and sentenced the appellant under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

During the appeal proceedings, the appellant challenged the conviction, arguing that the prosecution had failed to prove the demand and acceptance of the bribe. However, the High Court, after considering the evidence presented by the prosecution, including the testimony of the decoy witness and other witnesses, found that the demand and acceptance of illegal gratification had been amply proved.

The court emphasized that although there were minor contradictions in the evidence, they were insignificant and did not undermine the prosecution's case. It further noted that circumstantial evidence, such as the positive results of the phenolphthalein test, supported the conclusion that the appellant had accepted the tainted currency notes.

The defense had also presented a witness to support the appellant's version of events, but the court, after evaluating the witness's demeanor and considering the lack of corroborating evidence, found the defense witness unreliable.

Consequently, the High Court held that the appellant, in his capacity as a public servant, had abused his official position and accepted the illegal gratification. The conviction under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the PC Act was deemed justified.

Regarding the sentence, the court upheld the trial court's decision, which had sentenced the appellant to six months of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of ₹10,000/- under Section 7, and one year of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of ₹15,000/- under Section 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the PC Act. The sentence was considered reasonable, taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case.

Date of Decision:  16 June, 2023

K.R. MUHAMMED NAZER  vs STATE OF KERALA

Latest Legal News