Karnataka HC: A Neighbour Cannot be Charged With Matrimonial Cruelty under Section 498A IPC || Revisional Power U/S 25B(8) of Delhi Rent Control Act is Supervisory; HC Cannot Revisit Facts || Poverty Cannot Bar Parole; Rajasthan HC Waives Surety For Indigent Life Convict, Sets Guidelines || Delhi High Court: Late Payment of TDS Does Not Absolve Criminal Liability under the Income Tax Act || NCLT Kochi: Avoidance Provisions under Insolvency Code Aim to Restore, Not Punish, Parties || Bombay High Court: In IBC Cases, High Courts Lack Parallel Contempt Jurisdiction over the NCLT || Supreme Court: Concluded Auction Cannot Be Cancelled Merely To Invite Higher Bids at a Later Stage || SC: In Customs Classification, Statutory Tariff Headings and HSN Notes Prevail over Common Parlance || SC: Under the Urban Land Ceiling Act, Notice U/S 10(5) Must be Served on the Person in Possession || Supreme Court: Only Courts May Condone Delay; Tribunals Lack Power Unless Statute Allows

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 :