Madras HC: Police Superintendent not Liable For IO’s Delay In Filing Chargesheet or Closure Report || Supreme Court: Provident Fund Dues Have Priority over a Bank’s Claim under the SARFAESI Act || SC Holds Landowners Who Accept Compensation Settlements Cannot Later Seek Statutory Benefits || Supreme Court: Endless Investigations and Long Delays in Chargesheets Can Justify Quashing || Delhi HC: Arbitrator Controls Evidence and Appellate Courts Cannot Reassess Facts || Delhi HC: ED Can Search Anyone Holding Crime Proceeds, not Just Those Named in Complaint || Delhi HC: ED Can Search Anyone Holding Crime Proceeds, not Just Those Named in Complaint || Delhi HC: Economic Offender Cannot Seek Travel Abroad For Medical Treatment When Available In India || SC: Governors and President Have No Fixed Timeline To Assent To Bills; “Deemed Assent” is Invalid || SC: Assigning a Decree For Specific Performance of a Sale Agreement Does Not Require Registration

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 :