R.NARAYANA PISHARADI
VIGILANCE AND ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU REPRESENTED BY THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE – Appellant
Versus
K. SASIKALA W/O M. S MOHANAN – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Is it mandatory for the investigating agency or officer to seek and obtain permission of the trial court for conducting further investigation under Section 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'the Code'), after filing final report under Section 173(2) of the Code? This is the core question that arises for consideration in the present case.
2. A case was registered by the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB), Special Cell, Thiruvananthapuram as V.C.No.2/2004/SCT alleging commission of corrupt practices in relation to purchase of medicines in the Medical College Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram for the year 2003-2004. After completing the investigation, final report was filed in the Court of the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Thiruvananthapuram against the respondents for the offences under Sections 13(1)(d) and 15 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and also under Section 120B I.P.C.
3. The court below took cognizance of the offences on the basis of the final report. The applications for discharge filed by some of the accused under Section 239 of the Code were dismissed by the trial court.
4. The second accused made a petition to the
Antony Scaria v. State of Kerala : 2001 (2) KLT 93
Ram Lal Narang v. State : AIR 1979 SC 1791
State of West Bengal v. Salap Service Station : (1994) SCC (Cri) 1713)
Abdul Latheef v. State of Kerala : 2014 (3) KLT 905
State of A.P v. A.S.Peter : AIR 2008 SC 1052
Rama Chaudhary v. State of Bihar : AIR 2009 SC 2308
Samaj Parivartan Samudaya v. State of Karnataka : AIR 2012 SC 2326
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.