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

K.GOVINDARAJAN
L. Bhupathy – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent


ORDER

K. Govindarajan, J. - The petitioner has filed the above writ petition to declare that Section 19(3)(c) of Prevention of Corruption Act. 1988 (hereinafter called 'the Act') is unconstitutional and void in so far as the petitioner is concerned.

2. According to the petitioner the 3rd respondent filed charge - sheet against the petitioner before the IX Addl. City Civil Judge-cum-Principal Special Judge for CBI cases. Chennai in Crime No. RC. 50 (A)/94 under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Act. The said case has been numbered as C.C. No. 203 of 1997. Thereafter the petitioner moved a petition before the said Court under Section 395. Criminal Procedure Code questioning the jurisdiction of the trial Court in view of the fact that no valid notification has been issued by the Central Government as contemplated under Section 4(2) of the Act and prayed for an order to make reference to the High Court. The trial Court dismissed the said petition. On these backgrounds the petitioner has approached this Court questioning the constitutional validity of the said provision.

3. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that by introducing the said S

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