SimranLaw’s Post

Did my judge get bribed by the opponent? Here is why I’m never afraid of the judge being bribed by the opponent in any of my cases: 1. Strict Scrutiny by Authorities: The Supreme Court, High Courts, and the Vigilance Department rigorously monitor corrupt judges. Judges are well aware that if caught, they will face severe charges and significant problems. 2. Magnitude of Corruption: Corruption cases, when they do occur, typically involve stakes worth several crores of rupees. Therefore, a common person with disputes involving only a few lakhs or crores need not worry about the judge in their case being bribed. 3. Appellate Process: If I sense that a judge is biased against me, I can appeal the orders passed by such a judge. The appellate process ensures that subordinate courts are kept in check and establishes a fair procedure for adjudicating matters.

CBI Nabbed Two #Delhi #Police #Officers For #Bribery! In a recent #development, two officers of the Delhi Police, Inspector Sandeep Ahlawat and Sub-Inspector Bhupesh Kumar, were arrested by the Central Bureau Of Investigation. (CBI) for accepting a bribe of ₹10 lakh. This incident sheds light on the ongoing battle against corruption within law enforcement, with the officers being accused of involvement in a bribery scheme to extort money in exchange for not implicating an individual in a fabricated case. The arrest of these officers underscores the commitment to combat internal corruption within the system. Following a complaint filed on October 14, a prompt investigation by the CBI led to a sting operation that caught the accused officers in the act. Allegations against the officers included a demand for ₹1.5 crore to drop fabricated charges, eventually settling for ₹1 crore with an initial payment of ₹10 lakh. The successful sting operation by the CBI highlights the #dedication of anti-corruption bodies in upholding #integrity within #law #enforcement. The swift #administrative response by sending the Station House Officer of Burari police station to District Lines reflects the Delhi Police's proactive approach in addressing allegations of misconduct among its officers. Corruption within law enforcement not only erodes public trust but also undermines the fundamental principles of justice. Holding accountable those who betray their oath is crucial for restoring faith in the #justice system. The arrest of these officers sends a clear message that #corruption within the police force will not be tolerated, emphasizing the consequences for those who abuse their power. #justice #lawenforcement #accountability Please Follow Dr. Rajat Sharma for More Updates, Your Comments are Welcome Against Corruption!

🌟 Landmark Judgment! Supreme Court Rules on Privileges and Immunity in Bribery Cases 🌟 In a landmark decision from the Supreme Court - a significant ruling was made on privileges and immunity in bribery cases, overturning the 1998 PV Narasimha Rao judgment. This decision highlights the importance of upholding ethical standards in parliamentary democracy. Gist: 💡 Members of parliament or state legislatures cannot claim immunity from prosecution for bribery charges under Articles 105(2) and 194(2) of the Constitution. 💡 Corruption and bribery by legislators erode the foundation of Indian parliamentary democracy. 💡 The offence of bribery is deemed complete the moment illegal gratification is accepted, irrespective of subsequent actions. #supremecourt #BriberyJudgment #ethicalgovernance #ParliamentaryDemocracy #ruleoflaw

𝗥𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁 𝗧𝗼 𝗜𝗻𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 (𝗥𝗧𝗜) 𝗔𝗰𝘁, 𝟮𝟬𝟬𝟱 The Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, empowers Indian citizens by providing them access to information held by public authorities, fostering transparency and accountability in governance. 🔍 Enacted on October 12, 2005, the RTI Act ensures timely responses to information requests, specifies responsibilities for public authorities, and outlines clear procedures for filing and handling requests. ⏳ The Act also defines exemptions and the appeal process, granting powers to Information Commissions and imposing penalties for non-compliance. ⚖️ The RTI Act represents a significant legal framework aimed at combating corruption and nurturing an informed citizenry. 🌐 To read more click on the link below https://lnkd.in/gMcFAy23 #RightToInformation #RTIAct #Transparency #Governance #CitizenEmpowerment #PublicAccountability #AccessToInformation #LegalRights #AntiCorruption #IndiaLaw

This article penned by our associate Mr. Nitish Solanki offers a detailed exploration of the legal complexities of bribery in India under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (‘PCA’). It delves into the dual roles of bribe givers and receivers and examines how Indian law has evolved, particularly after the 2018 amendment, to address these issues. The article discusses the defences available to those compelled into bribery, including coercion, lack of intent, and voluntary disclosure. It concludes by acknowledging the challenges in proving compulsion and the potential misuse of defences while highlighting the PCA’s role in combating corruption. Please read the full article here: https://lnkd.in/drarqtCi #MetalegalAdvocates #MetalegalInsights #BriberyInIndia #PCA1988 #PreventionOfCorruptionAct #CorruptionLaws #2018Amendment #AntiCorruption #CompulsionDefence #CorruptionChallenges #CombatCorruption #LegalInsights

SUPREME COURT REFERS MATTER TO LARGER BENCH TO DECIDE THE ISSUE WHETHER POLICE OUGHT TO HAVE TAKEN PRIOR GOVERNMENT APPROVAL TO ARREST MR. CHANDRABABU NAIDU UNDER PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT 1988 IN THE AP SKILL DEVELOPMENT SCAM In a recent case of Nara Chandrababu Naidu vs The State of Andhra Pradesh and K. Ajay Reddy, Chairman of A.P. State Skill Development Corporation, Criminal Appeal No. 279 of 2024, a two Judge Bench of the Supreme Court comprising of Justice Aniruddha Bose and Justice Bela M. Trivedi passed a Judgment dated 16-01-2024 with different views on the interpretation of Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act) (Enquiry or Inquiry or investigation of offences relatable to recommendations made or decision taken by public servant in discharge of official functions or duties) and its applicability to the Appellant in the present case. Hence, the matter was referred to the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India for taking appropriate decision on placing the matter before a larger Bench for adjudication on the said point. Read more: https://lnkd.in/g2DAfTRD #supremecourt #highcourt #andhrapradesh #chandrababunaidu #arrest #remand #judicial #custody #police #approval #government

PC Act | Sanction Necessary To Summon Public Servant As Additional Accused As Per S.319 CrPC : Supreme Court The Supreme Court has reiterated that the court cannot take cognizance of an offence committed by a public servant under the Prevention of Corruption Act in the absence of prosecution sanction. The Court held that this condition is applicable even for summoning a public servant as an additional accused under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Court said that the accused cannot be summoned to face trial under Section 319 Cr.P.C. (now Section 358 of BNSS) without following the mandatory requirement of Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act (PC Act). “It is a well settled position of law that courts cannot take cognizance against any public servant for offences committed under Sections 7,11,13 & 15 of the P.C. Act, even on an application under section 319 of the CrPC, without first following the requirements of Section 19 of the P.C Act. Here, the correct procedure should have been for the prosecution to obtain sanction under Section 19 of the P.C Act from the appropriate Government, before formally moving an application before the Court under Section 319 of CrPC.”, the bench comprising Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Prasanna B Varale said. #SupremeCourt #PreventionOfCorruption #Law #CrPC

SUPREME COURT REFERS MATTER TO LARGER BENCH TO DECIDE THE ISSUE WHETHER POLICE OUGHT TO HAVE TAKEN PRIOR GOVERNMENT APPROVAL TO ARREST MR. CHANDRABABU NAIDU UNDER PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT 1988 IN THE AP SKILL DEVELOPMENT SCAM In a recent case of Nara Chandrababu Naidu vs The State of Andhra Pradesh and K. Ajay Reddy, Chairman of A.P. State Skill Development Corporation, Criminal Appeal No. 279 of 2024, a two Judge Bench of the Supreme Court comprising of Justice Aniruddha Bose and Justice Bela M. Trivedi passed a Judgment dated 16-01-2024 with different views on the interpretation of Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act) (Enquiry or Inquiry or investigation of offences relatable to recommendations made or decision taken by public servant in discharge of official functions or duties) and its applicability to the Appellant in the present case. Hence, the matter was referred to the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India for taking appropriate decision on placing the matter before a larger Bench for adjudication on the said point. Read more: https://lnkd.in/gaJui_ng #supremecourt #highcourt #andhrapradesh #chandrababunaidu #arrest #remand #judicial #custody #police #approval #government

The concept of a sting operation has been debated for a few days. Although Rule 30 of the Commission on Investigation of Abuse of Authority Regulations 2059 which permitted officials of CIAA to use public funds to check and test whether one accepts bribe or not was held unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 2021, the invalidation of the act of 'sting operation' has drastically reduced the conviction rate to 33% from 88% in 2021. While many argue that this has more negative lag effects in curbing the rate of corruption, the court stated that the right to sting operation and its legal validation would give excessive powers to the authority undermining the right to a fair trial. Sources: Supreme Court Case: https://lnkd.in/gESwqtTx Prevention of Corruption Act 2059: https://lnkd.in/gk3Aswkm CIAA Rules (old one with Rule 30): https://lnkd.in/gruUwby3 CIAA stats on conviction rate: https://lnkd.in/gxwRBN9q