SC: UGC Regulations Override State Law on Forming Search Committees For University VC Appointments || SC: State Cannot Deny Regularisation to Long-Serving Contract Staff Appointed Through Due Process || Supreme Court: Patients Cannot Claim Unproven Medical Treatments as a Matter of Right || SC: Polluting Company’s Turnover May Be Considered While Fixing Environmental Damage Compensation || Delhi HC: Dacoity Convicts U/S 395 IPC Cannot Claim Benefit under the Probation of Offenders Act || Bombay HC: An Adopted Child’s Caste is Considered the Same as That of the Adoptive Parents || Calcutta High Court: 18-Month Delay in Delivering a Judgment Alone is Not Sufficient to Set it Aside || Punjab & Haryana High Court: ED Can Arrest Individuals Even if FIRs are Added to the ECIR Later || SC: Menstrual Health is a Fundamental Right under Article 21; Orders Free Sanitary Pads in Schools || Supreme Court: Industrial Court is the Proper Forum to Decide Issues Relating to Contract Labour

Vigilance & Anti Corruption Bureau and ors v. Neyyattinkara P. Nagaraj and ors - (High Court of Kerala) (09 Nov 2015)

Justice not only done but also seen to be done: Kerala HC

Criminal

Kerala High Court held that the Director of Vigilance can give ‘timely directions’ while conducting investigation, but not after. Observations and findings on merits of the court below on the investigation below were set aside. The matter pertained to a Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau of Kerala investigation into an alleged demand of Rs. 5 crores to renew bar licences by Kerala’s Finance Minister. The Court cautioned against the possibility of an improper investigation by State a department when the accused endured as a Minister in the government.

Tags : VIGILANCE MINISTER IMPROPER INVESTIGATION

Share :