Supreme Court: Driving Licence Renewal After a Gap Will Not Take Effect From Expiry Date || Supreme Court: High Courts Cannot Quash Cheque Bounce Cases by Pre-Trial Inquiry Into Liability || Supreme Court: Passport Renewal Cannot be Denied if Trial Court Has Permitted it Despite Pending Case || SC: Delay in Depositing Sale Balance Does not Make Specific Performance Decree Inexecutable || Supreme Court: Non-Compete Fees Qualify as Deductible Revenue Expenditure under Income Tax Act || Supreme Court: Section 311 CrPC Should be Invoked Sparingly, Only When Evidence is Vital || J&K&L High Court: Successive Bail Applications Can Be Filed Even Without Change in Circumstances || Kerala HC: Fresh Arbitration Notice is Required For Second Arbitration After Prior Award Set Aside || NCLT Hyderabad: Mortgaging Property Without Lending Money Does Not Constitute Financial Debt || Supreme Court: Vacancies From Resignations under CUSAT Act Must Follow Communal Rotation

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 :