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

2010 Supreme(AP) 334

2011(2) ALT(CRI) 21
High Court of Andhra Pradesh
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY
Byrraju Ramalinga Raju
Versus
The State, CBI represented by Chief Investigating Officer, Hyderabad
CRL.P.Nos.5454, 5569 & 5564 of 2009
Decided on : 23-04-2010

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:C. Padmanabha Reddy, Senior Advocate for S. Bharat Kumar, D. Prakash Reddy Senior Advocate for K. Ravinder Reddy, B. Nalini Kumar, Advocates.
For the Respondents: M. Ravindran, Addl. Solicitor General of India & T. Niranjan Reddy, Special P.P. for CBI.

Headnote:

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Sections 53, 167 (2) (a), 482 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 409, 468 467 – Constitution of India, 1950 – Articles 20(3), 21 – Companies Act – Section 240 – Delhi Special Police Establish Act, 1946 – Section 6 – Incriminating Evidence – These criminal petitions filed are placed before us for hearing in view of the reference order passed by the learned single Judge of this Court to have an authoritative pronouncement on the issue – Whether the accused can be compelled to undergo Brain Mapping and Lie-Detector (polygraph) tests pursuant to the order passed by the XIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad – Held, After keeping the accused in silence for sometime relevant nooks of accused brain where memories are thought to be stored buzzed when the crime was recounted, which all involve invasion of the body of the accused or suspect without his consent, which is not permitted under law, which is in violation of Art.21 of the Constitution – In view of the same, the information received, if it is incriminating the person who makes it, he can invoke the protection under Art. 20(3) of the Constitution not only at the stage when the said incriminating evidence is tendered against him but also at the stage when the same is sought to be obtained from him – Therefore, subjecting the petitioners-accused to undergo above three tests is not in accordance with the procedure established by law, which clearly in violation of Art. 21 of the Constitution – For the foregoing reasons, court have no hesitation to hold that the petitioners/accused cannot be compelled to undergo brain mapping and lie detector (polygraph) tests in the absence of any procedure established by law to the said effect – The impugned order passed in by the XIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad is set-aside – Criminal Petitions Allowed

JUDGMENT

A. Gopal Reddy

1. These criminal petitions filed under Section 482 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short “the Cr.P.C.,”) are placed before us for hearing in view of the reference order dt. 25-8-2009 passed by the learned single Judge of this Court to have an authoritative pronouncement on the issue “whether the accused can be compelled to undergo Brain Mapping and Lie-Detector (polygraph) tests pursuant to the order passed by the XIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad dt. 9-7-2009 in Crl.M.P.No.1827/2009 in RC No.4(S)/2009/ CBI/HYD (later numbered as CC No.187/2009).

2. On the basis of a complaint lodged by Mrs. Leena Mangat W/o Nahar Singh against A-1, other directors, Auditors and others, to the Additional Director General of Police, CID, Hyderabad on 9-1-2009 stating that on seeing the performance of the company represented in and reflected through the balance sheet and with the belief that the representations made by the Chairman, the Managing Director and other Directors of M/s. Satyam Computer Services Limited (Ms.SCSL) to be true, she purchased 100 shares with her retirement benefits four years back for a total sum of Rs.19000/-; the value of the share of the company was at Rs.500/- in the market; on account of fudging of company accounts and manipulation of records showing incorrect and inflated figures in the balance sheet, the value of the shares of the company suddenly dropped causing financial loss to her and other shareholders, the CID, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad registered it as Cr.No.2/2009 on 9-1-2009 against A-1, Chairman of M/s. SCSL, Directors, Auditors and others under Sections 120-B, 420, 467, 471 and 477-A IPC. During the Course of Investigation, CID while deleting Section 406 IPC added Sections 409, 468 IPC in addition to Sec. 467 IPC.

3. On a request made by the Government of Andhra Pradesh by issuing a notification Dt.13-2-2009 under Section 6 of Delhi Special Police Establish Act, 1946 (for short “DSPE Act”) entrusting the investigation of the case to Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), the Government of India issued notification dt. 16-2-2009 under Section 5 of DSPE Act, extending powers and jurisdiction of CBI to whole State of Andhra Pradesh and thereby accorded consent to the CBI for investigation of Cr.No.2/2009 registered by the CID Police Station, Hyderabad. Pursuant to the same, a crime vide RC No.4 (S)/2009/CBI/HYD was registered on 20-2-2009. On registering the case, CBI got the police custody of the accused and interrogated them.

4. After completing investigation, CBI laid the charge sheet against the accused for commission of offences punishable under Sections 120-B r/w 420,419, 467, 468, 471, 477A and 201 IPC during the period 2001 to 2008. It was alleged that during the period 2001-2008, the accused lured the innocent investors under deception into buying shares of M/s. SCSL by publishing false and inflated balance sheets projecting a healthy picture about M/s. SCSL, thereby caused wrongful loss to the investors and they sold their shares at opportune times in the open market and received wrongful gain for themselves. Some of the public sector banks suffered a wrongful loss for a total amount of Rs.10.13 crores, and Life Insurance Corporation of India alone has suffered a loss of Rs.950 crores. The whole fraud was designed and orchestrated by A-1 to A-3 and got the same implemented with the active connivance of A-7, A-8 and A-9. A-4 and A-5 have actively participated in the conspiracy by auditing the fudged balance sheets and certified the same and thereby connived with the other accused. A-6 has actively participated in the conspiracy by assisting A-1 and A-2 in reaping maximum benefit from this fraud and in rotating the funds amongst the companies. During the said period, the accused have manipulated the results of the company and have shown heavy profits and growth rate on par with the market conditions and thereby kept the share price artificially hi








































































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

gpt-4

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 Back to top