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

1976 Supreme(Ker) 47

CHANDRASEKHARA MENON
VARGHESE – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. The petitioner is the accused in C. C. No. 9/72 before the Special Judge, Trivandrum. He was chargesheeted for having committed offences under S.5(2) read with S 5)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and under S.161 of the Indian Penal Code. He was convicted and sentenced by the 2nd respondent Special Judge Trivandrum h the first instance in C. C. 2/67.

2. Against that conviction and sentence the the petitioner filed an appeal before this court as Criminal Appeal 352/69. The contention taken in the criminal appeal was that as per S.6(1)(c) of the Act, no court shall take cognizance of an offence punishable under S 161 of IPC, or under sub-section (2) or sub-section (3-A) of S.5 of the Act alleged to have been committed by a public servant except with the previous sanction of the authority competent to remove him from his office.

3. The petitioner is an employee under the Kerala State Electricity Board. The Kerala State Electricity Board had given sanction under S.6(1)(c) of the Act to prosecute the petitioner for the aforementioned offences. In the criminal appeal before this court the petitioner contended that the sanction give



























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