B.KEMAL PASHA
Oommen Chandy – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
JUDGMENT
B. Kemal Pasha, J.—Is the Magistrate invoking the power under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. merely functioning as a ‘Post Office’ for forwarding anything and everything filed in the form of a complaint?
(2) Whether a Magistrate invoking the power under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. shall apply his mind to find out whether it is a complaint of facts constituting an offence?
(3) What should be a complaint on which a Magistrate can invoke the power under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.?
These are precisely the questions to be answered here.
2. Petitioners in O.P.(Crl.) No.50/2016 and O.P.(Crl.) No.51/2016 are respondents 1 and 2 respectively in the complaint by the 2nd respondent herein as CMP No.135/2016 before the Court of Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge (Vigilance), Thrissur, alleging offences punishable under Sections 13(1)(c) and 13(1)(d), may be intended to be read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The 1st respondent in the CMP was the then Chief Minister and the 2nd respondent in the CMP was the then Minister for Electricity of the State of Kerala.
3. The 2nd respondent herein had preferred the complaint based on some revelations allegedly made by a lady
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.