Demand of Bribe to be Proved in Bribery Case : SC Constitutional bench

A Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court (SC) declares, in Neeraj Dutta v State ( Govt of NCT, New Delhi) [2023(1) KLD 1 (SC), that the proof of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification by a Public Servant is a sine qua non to establish the guilt under Section 7 & 13 (1) (d) (i) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PCA).

A Cognizable Offence must be Reported to the Police before Making a Private Complaint about it to the Magistrate

A person aggrieved by a cognizable offence committed by someone else must first inform the officer in charge of a police station, who is required to record it in writing, read it back to the informant, and obtain their signature, under Section 154(1) of the Code of Criminal Proceedure,1967 (CrPC), says the Supreme Court ( SC) in Ranjit Singh Bath & Anr. v Union Territory Chandigarh & Anr.

Laws are Prospective but Case Laws are Retrospective

A law made by the legislature is always prospective in nature unless it has been specifically stated in the statute itself about its retrospective operation. But the reverse is true for the law which is laid down by a Constitutional Court, or law as it is interpretated by the court. The judgment of the court will always be retrospective in nature unless the judgment itself specifically states that the judgment will operate prospectively, says the Supreme Court (SC) in Kaniskh Sinha v State of West Bengal [2025 INSC 278].