SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1994 Supreme(SC) 302

A.M.AHMADI, M.N.VENKATACHALIAH
S. P. Vaithianathan – Appellant
Versus
K. Shanmuganathan – Respondent


Advocates:
K.SWAMY, N.NATRAJAN, V.BALACHANDRAN, V.KRISHNAMURTHY

Judgment

AHMADI, J.:- Special leave granted.

2. The respondent was the Additional Superintendent of Police, Prohibition and Enforcement, Salem, at all material times. The appellant herein was in-charge of an arrack shop belonging to his uncle at Sivathapuram. On account of illicit distillation in that area, the sales at the said arrack shop fell sharply. Consequently he complained to the authorities to check illicit distillation. His complaints fell on deaf cars. The illicit distillation activities were ever on the increase because of the connivance of the respondent. The appellant, therefore, complained to the higher authorities about the respondents involvement and deliberate connivance at the activities of illicit distillers. The respondent on learning about the complaints and allegation of corruption was annoyed and bore a grudge against the appellant. The respondent, therefore, summoned the appellant to his office on March 20, 1985 at about 8.30 p.m. and beat him up severely and then took him in a jeep to the Prohibition and Excise wing where he was further tortured. The appellant contends that it was by sheer accident that he escaped alive. He then wrote to the respondents supe




















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top