B. HANUMANTHA RAO versus STATE OF A.P.

B. HANUMANTHA RAO versus STATE OF A.P.

The undisputed recovery of Rs. 50,000 from the accused's possession, phenolphthalein test results, and lack of authority to receive rentals, together with concurrent factual findings, shifted the burden of proof to the accused; his explanation was not accepted, thus conviction and sentence are upheld.

Parties
Petitioner: B. Hanumantha Rao; Respondent: State of Andhra Pradesh
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
26 March 1992
Procedural Posture
Special Leave Petition (criminal) / Supreme Court Decision on Special Leave Petition
Outcome
Petition dismissed
Legal Topics
Trap Case, Illegal Gratification, Burden of Proof
Criminal Law Anti Corruption Law Trap Case Illegal Gratification Burden of Proof

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

B. Hanumantha Rao

Petitioner

State of Andhra Pradesh

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Special Leave Petition (criminal) / Supreme Court Decision on Special Leave Petition

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the burden of proof shifts to the accused on recovery of illegal gratification under Prevention of Corruption Act
  2. 2 Whether there is any ground for reducing the sentence imposed

Ratio Decidendi

The undisputed recovery of Rs. 50,000 from the accused's possession, phenolphthalein test results, and lack of authority to receive rentals, together with concurrent factual findings, shifted the burden of proof to the accused; his explanation was not accepted, thus conviction and sentence are upheld.

Court Disposition

Petition dismissed

Orders

  • Conviction and sentence confirmed
  • No reduction of sentence