STATE OF HARYANA Vs. ISRAIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is accused of an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act. He stands convicted by the trial Court. The State has sought leave to appeal against the order of acquittal of respondent - Israil. State counsel points pout that money was recovered and demanded, however, it is not disputed that the complainant had resiled. The independent witness also did not witness the recovery as he was standing outside. These are the good reasons given by the trial Court to acquit the respondent.

(2.) NO case for interference is called for. The leave to appeal is, accordingly, declined.