Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988

519 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act — showing 401–519.

MIR NAGVI ASKARIversusC. B. I.

2009 INSC 10307 August 2009Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the conduct of four bank officers (Accused 1, 2, 4 and 5) and a securities broker (Accused 3) who were alleged to have credited large sums to the broker's account without the corresponding bankers' cheques being in the bank’s possession, thereby causing loss to the bank. The Court held that a

SANJAY KUMAR RAIversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2021 INSC 2927 May 2021Directions issued

The appellant, Sanjay Kumar Rai, was charged under Sections 504 and 506 IPC for allegedly threatening a journalist and sought discharge under Section 239 CrPC, claiming the investigation was biased and the complainant’s testimony unreliable. The Chief Judicial Magistrate rejected the discharge application, and the High

M. NATARAJANversusSTATE BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SPE, CBI, ACB CHENNAI

2008 INSC 6007 May 2008Dismissed

The appellant, M. Natarajan, was charged under IPC sections 120B, 420, 467 and 471, and the Prevention of Corruption Act for preparing fabricated documents that facilitated the customs clearance of an imported car under the Transfer of Residence scheme. He claimed that the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme (KVSS) 1998, which g

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusSRI CHANNAKESHAVA.H.D. & ANR.

2025 INSC 4717 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Karnataka appealed a Karnataka High Court order that had quashed an FIR registered against Sri Channakeshava H.D., an executive engineer, for alleged disproportionate assets under Sections 13(1)(b) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The High Court had held that the Superintendent of Polic

EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED & ORS.versusRABINDRA KUMAR BHARTI

2022 INSC 4057 April 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a clerk, was suspended and later dismissed by Eastern Coalfields Ltd. on a complaint that he demanded a bribe to clear retirement formalities, leading to a criminal case under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The employer initiated departmental proceedings, which the respondent challenged in the

SHANTI LAL MEENAversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI, CBI

2015 INSC 9857 April 2015Dismissed

The appellant, a Sub‑Inspector of Police, was caught red‑handed accepting a bribe of Rs 25,000 and was convicted under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, receiving two years’ rigorous imprisonment for each offence with fines. The appeal before the Supreme Court was limite

GOPAKUMAR B. NAIRversusC.B.I. & ANR.

2014 INSC 2557 April 2014Dismissed

The appellant, GOPAKUMAR B. Nair, sought to have criminal proceedings quashed under Section 482 of the CrPC, arguing that a private settlement with the bank had extinguished the dispute. The High Court of Kerala declined to quash the case, where the appellant was charged with criminal conspiracy under the Prevention of

THE STATE OF PUNJABversusHARI KESH

2025 INSC 507 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Punjab prosecuted Hari Kesh under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, after a sanction order dated 19‑Nov‑2018 was issued. The trial had commenced and the prosecution had examined several witnesses when the accused filed a petition in the High Court seeking quashing of the sanct

M.E. SHIVALINGAMURTHYversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, BENGALURU

2020 INSC 67 January 2020Dismissed

The case involved a partnership firm (AMC) whose reconstitution in 2009 led the Director of Mines and Geology of Karnataka (the appellant) to issue Mineral Dispatch Permits (MDPs) to the new partners. The Central Bureau of Investigation alleged that the appellant acted without the prior State Government sanction requir

HEMAversusSTATE, THR. INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MADRAS

2013 INSC 97 January 2013Disposed off

The appellant, a clerk in a travel agency, was convicted under sections 120B, 420, 511, 465 and 471 of the IPC for conspiring to obtain 42 passports using forged applications and documents. The prosecution alleged that the travel agency, run by a co‑accused, submitted ante‑dated applications with duplicate file numbers

THE STATE OF TELANGANAversusSRI MANAGIPET @ MANGIPET SARVESHWAR REDDY

2019 INSC 13336 December 2019Disposed off

The State of Telangana filed a criminal appeal against a Hyderabad High Court order that partially quashed a charge‑sheet under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 against former OSD Sri Managipet @ Mangipet Sarveshwar Reddy for possessing assets disproportionate to his known income. The High Court had held that the

PARKASH SINGH BADAL AND ANR.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

2006 INSC 9606 December 2006Dismissed

The petitioners, including former Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal, challenged prosecutions under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the IPC on the ground that no prior sanction under Section 197 of the CrPC was obtained and that the complaints were filed with malafide intent. The Court examined the scope of

LALU PRASAD@ LALU PRASAD YADAVversusSTATE OF BIHAR THROUGH CBI (AHD) PATNA

2006 INSC 9616 December 2006Dismissed

The appeals concerned the validity of a sanction to prosecute Lalu Prasad Yadav under Sections 13(1)(e) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The sanction had been issued under Section 19(1)(b) of the Act and Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, but was signed by the Secretary to the Government

B. NOHAversusSTATE OF KERALA AND ANR.

2006 INSC 7876 November 2006Dismissed

B. Noha, a Health Inspector, was accused of demanding and accepting illegal gratuities from a push‑cart owner while performing his official duties. The trial court convicted him under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced him to three years’ rigorous imprisonmen

L. CHANDRAIAHversusSTATE OF A.P. AND ANR.

2003 INSC 6126 November 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved fraudulent withdrawals from recurring deposit accounts of Singareni Collieries workers at a Sub‑Post Office. A postal assistant (A‑3) fabricated vouchers with forged signatures and thumb impressions, and the Sub‑Post Masters (A‑1 and A‑2) signed the vouchers without verifying their authenticity. The t

PRINCIPAL SECY. GOVT. OF A.P. AND ANR.versusM. ADINARAYANA

2004 INSC 5816 October 2004Appeal(s) allowed

The Anti‑Corruption Bureau investigated M. Adinarayana under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for possessing assets disproportionate to his known income and for acquiring property without prior intimation, and referred the matter to the Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings (TDP). The TDP found him guilty of two

ROHILKHAND MEDICAL COLLEGE & HOSPITAL, BAREILLYversusMEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA & ANOTHER

2013 INSC 5956 September 2013Dismissed

Rohilkhand Medical College, established in 2005, sought renewal of its MBBS intake for the 2008‑09 batch, but the Medical Council of India (MCI) repeatedly recommended non‑renewal due to deficiencies. Despite this, the Central Government granted permission after a central inspection team, which was later found by the C

MANZOOR ALI KHANversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2014 INSC 5266 August 2014Disposed off

The petition sought a declaration that Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, which requires prior sanction before a public servant can be prosecuted, is unconstitutional and that all pending cases should proceed without such sanction. The Court examined whether the sanction requirement infringes the rig

MS. MAYAWATIversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2012 INSC 2726 July 2012Case Allowed

Mayawati, then Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, filed a writ petition under Article 32 challenging FIR No. RC 0062003A0019 dated 05.10.2003, which the CBI had lodged under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act alleging disproportionate assets. The FIR was said to be based on a Sup

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESHversusP. VENKATESHWARLU

2015 INSC 3846 May 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a Sub Registrar, was caught in a police‑laid trap after demanding a bribe of Rs.500 for registering a will. The prosecution proved demand and acceptance through eyewitness testimony, a positive phenolphthalein test, and the unchallenged recovery of the tainted money. The High Court acquitted the accused

DR. SUBRAMANIAN SWAMYversusDIRECTOR, CENTERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR.

2014 INSC 3586 May 2014Case Allowed

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of Section 6‑A of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (inserted by Section 26(c) of the Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003), which required prior approval of the Central Government before the CBI could inquire into or investigate alleged offences u

JAMIRUDDIN ANSARIversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR.

2009 INSC 7336 May 2009Disposed off

The case arose from a private complaint filed under Section 9(1) of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) alleging organised crime offences by senior police officials. The Special Court ordered an investigation, but the Bombay High Court Full Bench was split on whether such a complaint could be enterta

S.V.L.MURTHYversusSTATE REP. BY CBI, HYDERABAD

2009 INSC 7346 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved six accused bank officials and businessmen charged with criminal conspiracy, cheating and corruption for allegedly abusing a cheque‑discounting facility of State Bank of India. The Special Judge and the High Court convicted all six under Sections 120‑B and 420 of the IPC and, for three of them, under

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusRAMESHWAR & ORS.

2009 INSC 4566 April 2009Disposed off

The State of Madhya Pradesh prosecuted directors of Indore Premier Co-operative Bank for allegedly sanctioning loans without proper verification, invoking Sections 409, 418, 420, 120‑B IPC and Section 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The Trial Court framed charges, but the High Court

STATE OF A.P.versusM. RADHA KRISHNA MURTHY

2009 INSC 3416 March 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, an Excise Inspector, demanded a bribe of Rs.4,000 from a toddy shop owner and accepted Rs.2,000, after which a trap was laid and he was caught receiving the money. He was convicted by a Special Judge under Sections 7, 13(2) and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and sentenced to two yea

STATE OF WEST BENGALversusPRANAB RANJAN ROY

1998 INSC 1376 March 1998Appeal(s) allowed

The State of West Bengal prosecuted Pranab Ranjan Roy under the Prevention of Corruption Act for disproportionate assets. Roy filed a vakalatnama on 29‑02‑1992 through his counsel to obtain certain documents, and the charge‑sheet was filed only on 04‑05‑1994. When summoned, Roy sought discharge under Section 167(5) of

M/S. NAV NIRMAN BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, NAVEEN SINGHversusTHE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT, GOVT OF INDIA RANCHI, JHARKHAND

2026 INSC 1306 February 2026Appeal(s) allowed

Nav Nirman Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd. (appellant) had two parcels of land provisionally attached under the Prevention of Money‑Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) and a confirmation order under s.8(3) was challenged before the Appellate Tribunal under s.26. While the appeal was pending, the Enforcement Directorate filed a

ARVIND DHAMversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

2026 INSC 126 January 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a former promoter and non‑executive chairman of Amtek Auto Ltd., was arrested in July 2024 on allegations of massive bank fraud and money‑laundering under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). Despite cooperating with the investigation and being the sole accused taken into custody among 28

STATION HOUSE OFFICER, CBI/ACB/BANGALOREversusB.A. SRINIVASAN AND ANR.

2019 INSC 13225 December 2019Appeal(s) allowed

B.A. Srinivasan, a former Assistant General Manager of Vijaya Bank who retired on 31‑Oct‑2012, was alleged to have conspired with others to fraudulently sanction and disburse loans, violating bank rules. An FIR was lodged in 2013 and a charge‑sheet filed in 2014, charging him under IPC sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471,

C.B.I., A.H.D., PATNAversusBRAJ BHUSHAN PRASAD AND ORS.

2001 INSC 4855 October 2001Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether 36 fodder‑scam cases, originally filed before the Special Court in Patna, were transferred to courts in the newly created State of Jharkhand under Section 89 of the Bihar Reorganisation Act, 2000. The Court held that the word “exclusively” in that provision means “substantially all or

STATE THROUGH DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICEversusR. SOUNDIRARASU ETC.

2022 INSC 9155 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Tamil Nadu, through a Deputy Superintendent of Police, appealed against the High Court’s order discharging a public servant (R. Soundirarasu) and his wife from prosecution under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and IPC s.109 for possessing assets disproportionate to the servant’s known sources of inc

P. CHIDAMBARAMversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

2019 INSC 10105 September 2019Dismissed

The appellant, former Finance Minister P. Chidambaram, was charged with alleged irregularities in a foreign investment clearance and money‑laundering offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the Prevention of Money‑Laundering Act (PMLA). The Enforcement Directorate (ED) produced a sealed cover containing doc

SHRIDHAR NAMDEO LAWANDversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2013 INSC 5115 August 2013Disposed off

The appellant, Shridhar Namdeo Lawand, was convicted under Sections 7 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and appealed to the High Court. The High Court disposed of the appeal without the appellant being present and without examining the evidence, relying solely on the State’s counsel. The Supreme Court he

STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)versusPREM RAJ

2003 INSC 3675 August 2003Appeal(s) allowed

Prem Raj was convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced to two years of rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.500, and an additional three years of rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.1,000, to run concurrently. He appealed to the Delhi High Court seeking a reduction in the term of impri

MUKHTIAR SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2016 INSC 4985 July 2016Dismissed

Mukhtiar Singh, a revenue patwari, demanded Rs.600 from a complainant for a copy of a land record and was caught red‑handed when a police‑laid trap involving phenolphthalein‑treated currency notes was executed. The trial court convicted him under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988,

SURINDERJIT SINGH MAND & ANR.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

2016 INSC 4935 July 2016Dismissed

The case concerned the arrest and alleged illegal detention of Neeraj Kumar between 24‑06‑1999 and 28‑06‑1999 by two Deputy Superintendents of Police, Surinderjit Singh Mand and P.S. Parmar. The prosecution, after obtaining sanction under Section 197 of the CrPC for the later arrest on 28‑06‑1999, sought to take cogniz

J. SEKAR @SEKAR REDDYversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

2022 INSC 5195 May 2022Appeal(s) allowed

J. Sekar Reddy, managing partner of SRS Mining, was searched by the Income Tax Department in December 2016, leading to the seizure of about Rs 107 crore in cash and gold. The CBI registered FIRs for scheduled offences under the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act, and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) attached the

SYED YOUSUF HUSSAINversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2013 INSC 2175 April 2013Dismissed

Two traffic police officers intercepted a lorry on 4 January 1994, demanded Rs 100 to return the vehicle's documents and to refrain from filing a traffic case. The driver complained, a trap was set, and the co‑accused accepted the bribe, which was later recovered. Both were convicted under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read

L. LAXMIKANTAversusSTATE BY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, LOKAYUKTA

2015 INSC 975 February 2015Dismissed

The appellant, a hostel warden, was accused of demanding Rs.2000 as illegal gratification from a student seeking re‑admission to the hostel. The student complained to the Lokayukta, leading to a sting operation where the money, marked with a chemical that turned pink, was recovered from the warden's pocket. The trial c

STATE THROUGH CBI NEW DELHIversusJITENDER KUMAR SINGH

2014 INSC 805 February 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined two appeals concerning the jurisdiction of Special Judges appointed under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act). In the first appeal, a public servant died after the Special Judge had framed charges under the PC Act and IPC against him and several private persons. The Court held tha

GURDEV SINGH BHALLAversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ORS

2024 INSC 225 January 2024Dismissed

The appellant, an Inspector, was summoned along with three other police officials under Section 319 of the CrPC following allegations that they demanded money and tortured the accused and his family in a misappropriation case. The trial court allowed the summoning, the High Court upheld that order, and the appellant ch

DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER (APPELLATE AUTHORITY) AND OTHERSversusAJAI KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

2021 INSC 75 January 2021Appeal(s) allowed

Ajay Kumar Srivastava, a clerk of State Bank of India, was charged with seven counts of misappropriating bank funds. The enquiry officer found charges 2‑7 proved and charge 1 not proved. The disciplinary authority disagreed on charge 1, held it proved, but upheld the findings on charges 2‑7 and dismissed the employee.

M/S KULJA INDUSTRIES LIMITEDversusCHIEF GEN. MANAGER W.T. PROJ. BSNL AND ORS.

2013 INSC 6734 October 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Kulja Industries Ltd., supplied telecom equipment to BSNL under two tenders. BSNL later alleged that the appellant, in collusion with BSNL officials, received excess payments of Rs 7.98 crore through duplicate bills and blacklisted the appellant permanently. The appellant challenged the blacklisting, arg

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusSHEETLA SAHAI & ORS.

2009 INSC 9974 August 2009Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the prosecution of several senior officials, including the former Water Resources Minister of Madhya Pradesh, for alleged criminal conspiracy and misconduct under the Prevention of Corruption Act in connection with the Hasdeo Bango dam project. The respondents were accused of sanctioning extr

KALICHARAN MAHAPATRAversusSTATE OF ORISSA

1998 INSC 2824 August 1998Dismissed

Kalicharan Mahapatra, a retired IPS officer, was charged under Sections 13(2) and 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for possession of cash and jewellery discovered during a raid. He argued that, having retired before the charge‑sheet was filed, he could not be prosecuted because the Act required a prio

U. SUBHADRAMMA & ORS.versusSTATE OF A.P. REP. BY PUB. PROSECUTOR & ANR.

2016 INSC 4884 July 2016Appeal(s) allowed

Ramachandraiah was charged under IPC sections 409, 468 and 471 for misappropriating Rs. 6,57,355.90. He died in 1991 while the trial was pending; the trial court nevertheless recorded a finding that he alone had committed the offence, though he could not be convicted. The State then invoked Clause 3 of the Criminal Law

STATE THROUGH C.B.I., ANTI CORRUPTION BRANCH, CHANDIGARHversusSANJIV BHALLA & ANR.

2014 INSC 9804 July 2014Dismissed

The State (through CBI) appealed against a High Court order that released three accused—Sanjiv Bhalla, Major Purshotam Singh and R.P. Chopra—on probation of good conduct under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, after they were convicted of conspiracy to cheat under IPC sections 120‑B and 420. Only the fourth accused

ABHAY SINGH CHAUTALAversusC.B.I

2011 INSC 4484 July 2011Dismissed

The appellants, Abhay Singh Chautala and Ajay Singh Chautala, were tried for offences under Sections 13(1)(e) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, alleging accumulation of disproportionate assets while serving as Members of Legislative Assembly. No prior sanction under Section 19 of the Act was obtained, and

SUBBUSINGHversusSTATE BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

2009 INSC 6624 May 2009Dismissed

Subbusingh, a Sub‑Inspector of Police, demanded a bribe of Rs 500 from parties involved in a land dispute, using his friend Rajappan to collect the money and threatening the complainant with false criminal charges. A trap was set up in which the money was tested with phenolphthalein, which showed a positive result on S

SHOBHA SURESH JUMANIversusAPPELLATE TRIBUNAL, FORFEITED PROPERTY AND ANR.

2001 INSC 2544 May 2001Dismissed

The appellant, Shobha Suresh Jumani, wife of a detenu whose properties were ordered forfeited under the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976, filed an appeal claiming to be a "person aggrieved" under Section 12(4) of the Act and also sought maintenance under the Hindu Adoption

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusMAJOR R. METRI NO. 08585N

2022 INSC 3844 April 2022Case Partly allowed

The case concerned Major R. Metri, a Recruiting Medical Officer, who was convicted by a General Court Martial for helping candidates clear Army recruitment rallies in exchange for money, under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the Army Act. The Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) set aside the court‑martial’s conviction und

SITA SORENversusUNION OF INDIA

2024 INSC 1614 March 2024Reference answered

The appellant, Sita Soren, a member of the Jharkhand Legislative Assembly, was charged under the Prevention of Corruption Act for allegedly accepting a bribe to vote for an independent candidate in a Rajya Sabha election, but she ultimately voted for her party's candidate. She sought to quash the charges invoking Artic

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusJAGAT RAM

2024 INSC 9523 December 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The CBI appealed a Punjab & Haryana High Court order that acquitted Jagat Ram, a public servant, on the ground that the sanction order authorising prosecution was not examined. The trial court had convicted him under Sections 7 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, based on evidence of a bribe demand and ac

N.V. SUBBA RAOversusSTATE, THROUGH INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CBI/SPE,VISAKHAPATNAM, A.P.

2012 INSC 5603 December 2012Dismissed

The case involved a bank manager (A‑1) and a private firm proprietor (A‑2) who were accused of conspiring to defraud the Central Bank of India by sanctioning loans without obtaining mandatory undertaking letters, bypassing pre‑inspection requirements, and crediting the proceeds to A‑2’s account. The prosecution present

MMTC LIMITEDversusANGLO AMERICAN METALLURGICAL COAL PVT. LIMITED

2025 INSC 12793 November 2025Dismissed

MMTC Limited entered a Long Term Agreement with Anglo American Metallurgical Coal for the supply of coking coal, but a dispute arose over the price and unlifted quantities, leading to an arbitral award in favour of Anglo. MMTC challenged the award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, which was reje

TARINA SENversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2024 INSC 7523 October 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, two women related to a co‑accused, were charged under Sections 120‑B, 420, 468 and 471 of the IPC and Sections 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act for alleged loan fraud involving a bank. The borrowers later entered into a One‑Time Settlement with the bank, paid the full amount

K. BHARTHI DEVI AND ANR.versusSTATE OF TELANGANA AND ANR.

2024 INSC 7503 October 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, who were wives of borrowers, were charged by the CBI under sections of the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act for alleged fraud in a bank loan. The borrowers had settled the entire debt through a One Time Settlement and the bank closed the loan account, obtaining a No Dues Certificate. The appella

RAM LALversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2018 INSC 9183 October 2018Case Partly allowed

Ram Lal, a peon employed by United Commercial Bank, was assigned clerical duties of a cash clerk and allegedly misappropriated Rs.38,500 by pocketing deposits and forging entries to enable withdrawals. The prosecution relied heavily on two extra‑judicial confession statements made by the accused in the presence of seni

STATE OF A.P.versusP. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

2008 INSC 11203 October 2008Case Partly allowed

The respondent, a Development Officer of the Andhra Pradesh Khadi and Village Industries Board, was caught demanding and receiving a Rs.500 bribe from a loan applicant (PW‑1) to revive a lapsed loan. The trial court convicted him under Sections 13(2) and 13(1)(d)(i) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, sentencing

SHAHID BALWAversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 5863 September 2013Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether its own orders dated 11 April 2011 and 9 November 2012, issued under Articles 136 and 142 while monitoring the 2G spectrum scam investigation, could be recalled. The petitioners argued that the orders infringed their right to approach the High Courts under Articles 226, 227 and Sectio

STATE OF A.P.versusK. PUNARDANA RAO

2004 INSC 4953 September 2004Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Andhra Pradesh appealed the acquittal of K. P. Rao, a Commercial Tax Officer, who had been convicted by a Special Judge for demanding a bribe under sections 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The prosecution proved that the complainant visited Rao's house, handed over Rs.20,000 a

STATE REP. BY C.B.I.versusANILSHARMA

1997 INSC 6393 September 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) investigated former Himachal Pradesh minister Anil Sharma under Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for possessing assets disproportionate to his known income. Sharma applied to the Himachal Pradesh High Court for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the C

STATE OF KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA POLICEversusS. SUBBEGOWDA

2023 INSC 6693 August 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Karnataka Lokayukta Police appealed against the Karnataka High Court’s order that discharged S. Subbegowda, an executive engineer, from charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The respondent had faced a charge of amassing disproportionate wealth and the prosecution had examined 17 witnesses a

VIJAY KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

2011 INSC 5423 August 2011Disposed off

Vijay Kumar, the father of Ruchi Saxena, filed a complaint alleging that officials of the Nagar Palika demanded a bribe to settle a land dispute. Two officials were arrested and tried under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The accused sought to summon Ruchi Saxena as a court witness under Section 311 of the Code

BHIARU RAM AND ORS.versusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION AND ORS.

2010 INSC 4703 August 2010Dismissed

The petitioners, accused in a CBI case under the Prevention of Corruption Act for abetting the possession of disproportionate assets by a senior income‑tax officer, filed a transfer petition under Section 406 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to move the trial from the Special Court, CBI, Greater Mumbai to a Sp

DR. RINI JOHAR & ANR.versusSTATE OF M.P. & ORS.

2016 INSC 4413 June 2016Case Allowed

Dr. Rini Johar, a doctor, and a senior advocate were arrested in November 2012 on a FIR alleging fraud under IPC sections 420 and 34 and the Information Technology Act. The arrest was carried out without complying with Sections 41 and 41‑A of the CrPC, nor the D.K. Basu guidelines, and the petitioners were taken to Bho

VIDYA DHAR & ORS.versusMULTI SCREEN MEDIA PVT. LTD.

2013 INSC 3013 May 2013Dismissed

Three petitioners convicted in the Junior Basic Trained (JBT) teachers recruitment scam appealed their convictions before the Delhi High Court. While the appeal was pending, the respondent, a television producer, sought to broadcast a dramatized episode of "Crime Patrol Dastak" depicting the scam. The petitioners obtai

INDERPREET SINGH KAHLON AND ORS.versusSTA TE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

2006 INSC 2883 May 2006Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the termination of over 150 civil and judicial officers appointed by the Punjab Public Service Commission during the tenure of its chairman, who was alleged to have taken bribes and corrupted the selection process. The appellants argued that their services were dismissed without due process,

DEVINDER KUMAR BANSALversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB

2025 INSC 3203 March 2025Dismissed

The petitioner, Devinder Kumar Bansal, an Audit Inspector, was alleged to have demanded and facilitated a bribe during an audit of development work while the complainant's wife served as Sarpanch, with co‑accused Prithvi Singh collecting the money on his behalf. An FIR was lodged under Section 7 of the Prevention of Co

SACHIN KUMAR & ORS.versusDELHI SUBORDINATE SERVICE SELECTION BOARD (DSSSB) & ORS.

2021 INSC 1473 March 2021Disposed off

The Delhi Subordinate Service Selection Board (DSSSB) conducted a two‑tier examination for 231 Head Clerk vacancies in 2009, but the Tier‑I exam was delayed until 2014 and only 8,224 of 62,056 applicants appeared. Numerous complaints of question‑paper leakage, mass cheating, lack of randomisation and impersonation led

PHULA SINGHversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2014 INSC 1613 March 2014Dismissed

The appellant, a Kanungo, was accused of demanding and accepting a bribe under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 after a trap was laid by the complainant. Although the trial court acquitted him, the High Court convicted him, sentencing him to one year imprisonment and a fine. On appeal, the

CENTRE FOR PIL & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2011 INSC 1753 March 2011Case Allowed

The Supreme Court examined the legality of Shri P.J. Thomas's appointment as Central Vigilance Commissioner under Section 4(1) of the Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003, which was based on a recommendation by the High Powered Committee (HPC). The Court found that the HPC failed to consider material indicating pendi

AIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIAversusPRADIP KUMAR BANERJEE

2025 INSC 1493 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, an Assistant Engineer of the Airports Authority of India, was arrested and convicted for demanding illegal gratification, leading to his dismissal from service. After being acquitted on benefit of doubt in a criminal appeal, he sought reinstatement, but the Authority initiated fresh disciplinary proceed

N. VIJAYAKUMARversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2021 INSC 603 February 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Sanitary Inspector, was charged under Sections 7, 13(2) and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act for demanding Rs.500 and a cell phone as bribe from a supervisor to process a contract extension. The trial court acquitted him, but the Madras High Court reversed the acquittal and convicted him, r

OPTO CIRCUIT INDIA LTD.versusAXIS BANK & ORS.

2021 INSC 563 February 2021Case Partly allowed

The Enforcement Directorate, invoking the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA), issued a communication on 15 May 2020 directing several banks to debit‑freeze the accounts of Opto Circuit India Ltd. The company challenged the order, seeking its quash and the defreezing of the accounts to enable payment of sta

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusFATEHKARAN MEHDU

2017 INSC 1043 February 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan appealed against the High Court’s order quashing charges framed by a Special Judge against mining engineer Fatehkaran Mehdu and Kishan Singh Rawat under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The charges alleged that Mehdu, while granting a quarry licence, sanctioned an area of 80,000 sq. ft. on

MOHMOODKHAN MAHBOOBKHAN PATHANversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

1997 INSC 873 February 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Sub‑Registrar, was convicted under Section 161 IPC and Section 5(2) read with 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 for allegedly receiving Rs 60 as illegal gratification for issuing certified copies of sale deeds. The prosecution set up a trap and caught him taking the money, but the appel

VINAYAK NARAYAN DEOSTHALIversusC.B.I.

2014 INSC 10342 December 2014Disposed off

Vinayak Narayan Deosthali, an assistant manager of UCO Bank, was convicted for diverting Rs 7.75 crore of public funds belonging to the Engineering Export Promotion Council (EEPC) to the private account of broker Harshad S. Mehta. The Special Court found that he issued bank receipts for securities that did not exist, f

HIMACHAL PRADESH CRICKET ASSOCIATION & ANR.versusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS.

2018 INSC 10392 November 2018Disposed off

The Himachal Pradesh Cricket Association (HPCA) was granted lease of government land to build a world‑class cricket stadium, later receiving additional land for a club house and a hotel at commercial rates. Two FIRs were filed alleging illegal lease grants, cheating, criminal breach of trust and violations of the Preve

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusSHAMBHU DAYAL NAGAR

2006 INSC 7822 November 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Assistant Sub-Inspector Shambhu Dayal Nagar was trapped after agreeing to accept a bribe of Rs.3500 from complainant Badan Singh. The money, smeared with phenolphthalein powder, was recovered from the accused's upper right pocket of his uniform shirt and the powder transfer was demonstrated by a pink colour change in a

ARUN KUMAR AGGARWALversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ORS.

2011 INSC 6442 September 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant complained to the Lokayukta that three government officials had caused a loss of Rs.4 crore to the State of Madhya Pradesh by purchasing land at inflated prices. The Lokayukta police investigated, exonerated the officials and filed a closure report under Section 169 of the Cr.P.C. before the Special Judge

STATE OF PUNJABversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ORS.

2011 INSC 6392 September 2011Dismissed

The State of Punjab appealed against a Punjab and Haryana High Court order that directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to take over fresh investigation of several FIRs, including one for which a charge‑sheet had already been filed under Section 173(2) of the Cr.P.C. The petition raised the question whether

NEERA YADAVversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATON

2017 INSC 6982 August 2017Case Partly allowed

Neera Yadav, while serving as Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer of the New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA), filed ante‑dated and incomplete applications to obtain residential plots for herself and her daughters, manipulated the layout plan to enlarge her plot, and secured shop allotments for her da

RAJIV KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANR.

2017 INSC 6992 August 2017Case Partly allowed

The case involved the Deputy Chief Executive Officer of NOIDA, Rajiv Kumar, and the Chairperson‑Chief Executive Officer, Neera Yadav, who were accused of conspiring to illegally convert a government guest‑house plot into a residential plot and allot it to Kumar at a substantially lower premium, thereby obtaining a valu

P. PARASURAMI REDDYversusSTATE OF A.P.

2011 INSC 5352 August 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Mandal Development Officer, was charged under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for demanding a Rs.500 bribe in connection with a loan for a community irrigation well. The complainant alleged that the demand was made on 31‑12‑1993 and reiterated on 6‑1‑19

K.C. SAREENversusC.B.I., CHANDIGARH

2001 INSC 3352 August 2001Dismissed

K.C. Sareen, a Punjab National Bank officer, was convicted under Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and IPC sections 120, 201 and 420 for defrauding the bank and was sentenced to one year of rigorous imprisonment and a fine. He was dismissed from service and appealed to the Punjab and Haryana High

COMMON CAUSE (A REGD. SOCIETY) & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2018 INSC 5682 July 2018Disposed off

The petitioners, including Common Cause, challenged the appointments of K.V. Chowdary as Central Vigilance Commissioner (CVC) and T.M. Bhasin as Vigilance Commissioner (VC) on the ground that the selections violated the constitutional principles of impeccable and institutional integrity. They alleged that Chowdary had

P. SANJEEVA RAOversusTHE STATE OF A.P.

2012 INSC 2602 July 2012Appeal(s) allowed

P. Sanjeeva Rao was tried under the Prevention of Corruption Act for demanding and receiving a bribe. During the trial, prosecution witnesses PW1 (the complainant) and PW2 (an independent witness) were examined, but their cross‑examination was deferred pending the examination of the trap‑laying officer PW11. The appell

C.B.I. BANK SECURITIES & FRAUD CELLversusRAMESH GELLI & ORS.

2016 INSC 11802 May 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The CBI Bank Securities & Fraud Cell appealed against the Mumbai High Court’s judgment in criminal revision applications involving Ramesh Gelli and others. The appeal contested the accuracy of statutory citations in paragraph 25 of the High Court’s order, which incorrectly referred to Section 46 of the Banking Regulati

HIRA LAL HARI LAL BHAGWATI.versusC.B.I., NEW DELHI

2003 INSC 2752 May 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The Gujarat Cancer Society imported MRI and lithotripsy machines under a customs duty exemption certificate that required the equipment to be used by the "actual user". The Customs Collector later held the society liable for duty but, considering its charitable purpose, imposed only a token fine and did not prosecute.

NATIONAL FERTILIZERS LTD.versusTUNCAY ALANKUS & ANR.

2013 INSC 2032 April 2013Dismissed

National Fertilizers Ltd. (NFL) paid $38 million for urea to a Turkish company, Karsan, but never received the product. The manager of Karsan, Tuncay Alankus, was extradited to India and faced criminal proceedings. The Supreme Court, on 4 September 2006 and again on 14 December 2006, restrained Alankus from withdrawing

STATE OF GUJARATversusBHALCHANDRA LAXMISHANKAR DAVE

2021 INSC 532 February 2021

The State of Gujarat prosecuted Bhalchandra Laxmishankar Dave, an Assistant Director, under Section 7 read with Sections 13(1) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The Special Judge, Bharuch, after a full trial, convicted him and sentenced him to five years' imprisonment and a fine of Rs.10,000. On appeal, th

HABIBULLA KHANversusSTATE OF ORISSA AND ANR.

1995 INSC 932 February 1995Dismissed

The appellants, who had served as Ministers in the Orissa government and later became Members of the Legislative Assembly (MLAs), were prosecuted for criminal misconduct under Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. They contended that, being MLAs at the time of taking cognizance, they were public s

CAMPAIGN FOR JUDICIAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND REFORMSversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2017 INSC 10911 December 2017Dismissed

The Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms filed a public‑interest litigation seeking a writ of mandamus directing the Supreme Court to constitute a Special Investigation Team, headed by a retired Chief Justice of India, to probe an FIR (RCIO(A)/2017‑AC.III) alleging conspiracy and bribes to obtain a favourab

UNION OF INDIA ETC. REP. THROUGH SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICEversusT. NATHAMUNI

2014 INSC 8241 December 2014Appeal(s) allowed

A complaint of bribery was lodged against T. Nathamuni, an Income Tax Inspector, leading to a CBI case under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The investigating officer, initially an Inspector of Police, was replaced by Sub‑Inspector G.A. Suriya Kumar after a petition under Section 17 of the Act obtained permissi

B.C. CHATURVEDIversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1995 INSC 6611 November 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an Income Tax Officer, was investigated by the CBI and found to hold assets disproportionate to his known income. Although the evidence was insufficient for criminal prosecution under Section 5(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, a departmental inquiry proved the misconduct and dismissed him

SUDHIRversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

2015 INSC 7251 October 2015Dismissed

The case involved two officials of the Rural Water Supply Department of Zilla Parishad, Jalgaon, accused of misappropriating public funds allocated for rural drinking‑water schemes. FIRs were filed after an enquiry by the Revenue Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner, alleging large sums were siphoned through fictitious

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusJAGJIT SINGH

2013 INSC 6641 October 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The CBI filed a criminal case against Jagjit Singh and others for cheating and forgery under Sections 420 and 471 IPC, alleging that they obtained bank loans through forged documents with the collusion of bank officials. The accused later settled the debt with Indian Overseas Bank by complying with an order of the Debt

ANIL KUMAR & ORS.versusM. K. AIYAPPA & ANR.

2013 INSC 6661 October 2013Dismissed

The appellants filed a private complaint under Section 200 of the CrPC alleging that the respondent, a public servant, committed offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The Special Judge referred the complaint for investigation by the Karnataka Lokayukta under Section 156(3) of the CrPC without obtaining

RANVIR SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

2009 INSC 10951 September 2009Dismissed

Ranvir Singh challenged two criminal complaints filed by Smt. Ved Wati under the Prevention of Corruption Act, alleging that the first complaint (1999) and a later complaint (2002) were dismissed because the complainant failed to pay the process fee. He argued that a second complaint on the same facts could not be ente

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusM. SIVAMANI

2017 INSC 6951 August 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The CBI filed a charge sheet alleging a false insurance claim and charged several persons, including advocate M. Sivamani, under IPC sections 182, 120‑B, 420, 468, 471 and the Prevention of Corruption Act. Sivamani moved a petition invoking CrPC s.195(1)(a)(i), contending that the court could not take cognizance of the

SHAURYA SUNIL KUMAR SINGHversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

2026 INSC 6661 July 2026Dismissed

The appellant, Shaurya Sunil Kumar Singh, was arrested in connection with a cyber‑fraud case involving a mule company and was charged under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the Prevention of Corruption Act and the IT Act. After being remanded, the investigating agency filed a charge‑sheet on 2 September 2025, but failed to

ESSAR TELEHOLDINGS LTD.versusREGISTRAR GENERAL, DELHI HIGH COURT & ORS

2013 INSC 3741 July 2013Dismissed

The petitioners, including Essar Teleholdings Ltd., challenged the Delhi High Court's administrative order and the NCT of Delhi's notification appointing a Special Judge to try the 2G spectrum case, arguing that the Special Judge lacked jurisdiction to try IPC offences (420/120‑B) arising from the same transaction. The

B. RAGHUVIR ACHARYAversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

2013 INSC 3801 July 2013Disposed off

The case involved a Rs 65 crore investment in CANCIGO units of Canbank Mutual Fund (CMF) by four subscribers, where B. Raghuvir Acharya (Trustee/General Manager) and Hiten P. Dalal (approved broker) were alleged to have obtained a false brokerage of Rs 32.5 lakhs. The Special Court convicted Acharya and Dalal, but acqu

AMAN BHATIAversusSTATE (GNCT OF DELHI)

2025 INSC 6181 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a licensed stamp vendor, was caught in a sting operation after demanding Rs 12 for a Rs 10 stamp paper and was convicted under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The key issue was whether a licensed stamp vendor qualifies as a “public servant” under Section 2(c)(i)

STATE BY KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA POLICE STATION, BENGALURUversusM.R. HIREMATH

2019 INSC 6111 May 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The State by Karnataka Lokayukta Police Station appealed against a High Court order that quashed criminal proceedings against M.R. Hiremath on the ground that a certificate under Section 65B(4) of the Evidence Act was not produced. The Court examined whether the certificate must be produced at the stage of filing the c

GENERAL OFFICER COMMANDINGversusCBI AND ANR

2012 INSC 1961 May 2012Disposed off

The CBI investigated a 2000 fake encounter at Pathribal in Jammu & Kashmir, where five alleged terrorists were killed by members of the 7 Rashtriya Rifles, and filed a charge‑sheet against several army officers. The officers invoked Section 7 of the Armed Forces (Jammu & Kashmir) Special Powers Act, 1990, claiming that

LALU PRASAD YADAVversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ANR.

2010 INSC 1881 April 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether the State of Bihar could file an appeal under Section 378(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against an acquittal rendered by a Special CBI Judge when the offence was investigated by the Delhi Special Police Establishment (CBI). The Court held that the opening words "save as o

THE STATE OF CHATTISGARH & ANRversusAMAN KUMAR SINGH & ORS. ETC. ETC

2023 INSC 1891 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Chhattisgarh filed criminal appeals against the Chhattisgarh High Court’s order quashing FIR No. 9/2020, which alleged that Aman Kumar Singh (AS) and his wife Yasmin Singh (YS) had amassed assets disproportionate to their known sources of income under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The High Court

THE STATE REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICEversusTR N SEENIVASAGAN

2021 INSC 1251 March 2021Leave Granted & Allowed

In 2010 an FIR under the Prevention of Corruption Act was lodged against T. N. Seenivasagan, a chief engineer of TANGEDCO, for allegedly demanding a bribe. The sanction to prosecute was issued by the Chairman of TANGEDCO, purportedly on behalf of the Board, and the trial proceeded with witnesses PW‑1 (Chairman) and PW‑

K.S. PANDURANGAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2013 INSC 1311 March 2013Disposed off

The appellant, a superintendent at KAVIKA, was convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for demanding and accepting a Rs 5,000 bribe in exchange for allocating transport loads. The Supreme Court examined whether the statutory presumption under s.20 of the Act could be rebutted; it held that the appellant’

VISHWANATH CHATURVEDIversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2007 INSC 2361 March 2007Disposed off

The petitioner filed a public interest litigation under Article 32 alleging that the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, Mulayam Singh Yadav, and his family acquired assets disproportionate to their known sources of income, violating the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The petition sought a writ of mandamus directing

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusSHRI RAM SINGH

2000 INSC 461 February 2000

The State of Madhya Pradesh filed criminal appeals against Ram Singh and two other public servants who were charged under Sections 13(1)(e) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for possessing assets disproportionate to their known sources of income. The investigations were authorised by the Superintenden

THE STATE, CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusA. SATISH KUMAR & ORS.

2025 INSC 111 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) filed appeals against a High Court order that quashed FIRs and subsequent proceedings against two Central Government employees accused of offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The respondents argued that, following the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh, the CBI req

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search