Back
K. BABU
State Of Kerala Represented By The Additional Public Prosecutor – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Director Directorate Of Enforcement – Respondent
ORDER :
The challenge in this Cri.M.C. is to the order dated 12.01.2024 in Crl.M.P.No.1187 of 2023 in SC (PMLA) 04/2023 on the file of the Special Court for the trial of offence punishable under Section 4 of the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002, Ernakulam (the Additional Special Sessions Court (SPE/CBI)-III, Ernakulam). The State of Kerala challenges the order refusing the application filed under Section 91 Cr.P.C. by the Chief Investigating Officer of the Special Investigation Team constituted to investigate the financial/loan scam of Karuvannur Service Co-operative Bank Limited.
Facts:-
2. The Secretary-in-charge of the Karuvannur Service Co-operative Bank Ltd filed a complaint before the Irinjalakuda Police against six persons on 14.07.2021 alleging offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 409, 465 r/w 34 of IPC. The Police registered an FIR alleging the aforesaid offences. As per order No.D3-108924/201/PHQ dated 21.07.2021, the investigation of the case was transferred to the Crime Branch, which registered Crime No. Cr.165/CB/TSR/R/21. During the investigation, offences under Sections 13(1)(c) and 13(1) (d) r/w 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, (PC Act f
The main legal point established is that the term 'Court' in Section 91 Cr.P.C. is not limited to the Court where the FIR was filed, and the power to seize documents for investigation purposes extend....
Accused cannot seek documents to prove innocence at the stage of framing charges under Sec. 91 of Cr.P.C.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the accused's entitlement to seek production of documents under Sec. 91 would ordinarily not come till the stage of defense, and the expressio....
The defense cannot be considered at the stage of framing of charge to avoid a mini trial, and the documents sought to be relied upon by the accused persons could only be considered after trial.
The court emphasized the importance of Section 91 of Cr.P.C. in enabling the court to summon relevant documents or materials for a fair trial.
At the discharge stage, an accused cannot seek production of documents under Section 91 of Cr.P.C, as the right to produce evidence arises only during the trial phase.
Section 91 of Cr.P.C. reads as summons to produce document or other thing.
The right to seek document production under Section 91 of CrPC arises only at the defense stage, not during pre-charge proceedings.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Enforcement Directorate should follow the prescribed procedure under the Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019 for obtaining certified copies o....
(1) Documents which were not part of charge-sheet, but seized by investigating agency during investigation of offence, cannot be withheld by prosecution merely on the ground that documents sought to ....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
