Back
(BEFORE R.N. AGRAWALANOA.K. MATHUR, JJ.)
K. DEVASSIA - Appellant;
Versus
STATE OF KERALA - Respondent.
Criminal Appeal No. 625 of 2000,
decided on March 29, 2006
Sanction - Conviction Challenge - Secretary (Vigilance) - The court set aside the impugned orders and acquitted the appellant based on the unauthorized grant of sanction by the Secretary (Vigilance) prior to the date of authorization.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant challenged his conviction, arguing that the Secretary (Vigilance) who granted sanction was not authorized to do so.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned orders, and acquitted the appellant of the charges due to the unauthorized grant of sanction by the Secretary (Vigilance). The appellant was discharged from the liability of bail bonds.
Issues: Conviction challenge based on unauthorized grant of sanction by the Secretary (Vigilance).
Ratio Decidendi: The unauthorized grant of sanction by the Secretary (Vigilance) prior to the date of authorization rendered the impugned orders fit to be set aside, leading to the acquittal of the appellant.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, the impugned orders were set aside, and the appellant was acquitted of the charges. The appellant was discharged from the liability of bail bonds.
ORDER
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. In the present case, the sole appellant has challenged his conviction and pointed out that the Secretary (Vigilance), who accorded sanction, was not authorised to grant sanction. In this connection, reliance has been placed upon the judgment of this Court in P.A. Mohandas v. State of Kerala1 in which it has been laid down that for the first time Secretary (Vigilance) was authorised to accord sanction on 23-4-1994 and prior to that he was not competent to accord sanction. In the present case, the sanction is said to have been granted by the Secretary (Vigilance) prior to 23-4-1994, therefore, the impugned orders are fit to be set aside on this ground alone.
3. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed, the impugned orders are set aside and the appellant is acquitted of the charges. The appellant, who is on bail, is discharged from the liability of bail bonds.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
