Bombay HC: Railway Employee With Valid Privilege Pass is Bona Fide Passenger Despite Missing Entries || Delhi High Court: Mere Pleadings Made To Prosecute or Defend a Case Do Not Amount To Defamation || Delhi High Court: Asking an Accused To Cross-Examine a Witness Without Legal Aid Vitiates The Trial || Delhi High Court: Recruitment Notice Error Creates No Appointment Right Without Vacancy || Supreme Court: Subordinate Legislation Takes Effect Only From its Publication in The Official Gazette || Supreme Court: DDA Must Adopt a Litigation Policy To Screen Cases and Avoid Unnecessary Filings || Authorities Holding Public Auctions Must Disclose All Known Encumbrances and Related Litigation || SC: Compensatory Allowances Must Be Included While Computing Overtime Wages U/S 59 of Factories Act || SC: NGT Has No Jurisdiction to Decide Disputes Relating to Building Plan Violations || SC: Evidence is Often Fabricated Using AI And False Allegations are Rampant in Matrimonial Cases

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 :