Calcutta HC: Award May Be Set Aside if Tribunal Rewrites Contract or Ignores Key Clauses || Delhi HC Suspends Kuldeep Singh Sengar’s Life Term, Holding Section 5(C) of POCSO Not Made Out || Calcutta High Court: Arbitration Clause in an Expired Lease Cannot be Invoked For a Fresh Lease || Delhi High Court: 120-Day Timeline under Section 132B Of Income Tax Act is Not Mandatory || NCLAT Reaffirms That Borrower's Debt Acknowledgment Also Extends Limitation Period for Guarantors || NCLAT: Oppression & Mismanagement Petition Cannot Be Filed Without Company Membership on Filing Date || Supreme Court Quashes Rajasthan Village Renaming, Says Government Must Follow its Own Policy || NCLAT: NCLT Can Order Forensic Audit on its Own, No Separate Application Required || NCLAT Reiterates That IBC Cannot be Invoked as a Recovery Tool for Contractual Disputes || Delhi HC: DRI or Central Revenues Control Lab Presence in Delhi Alone Does Not Confer Jurisdiction

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 :