Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A.Badharudeen
M.S.Muraleedharan – Appellant
Versus
Central Bureau Of Investigation (CBI) – Respondent
ORDER :
A. Badharudeen, J.
The 3rd accused in C.C. No.43/2014 on the of the Court of the Additional Special Sessions Judge (SPE/CBI)-III, Ernakulam, has filed this criminal revision petition under Sections 438 and 442 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 , challenging the order dated 10.03.2025, whereby the plea of discharge raised by the 3rd accused was negatived by the special court and consequently charge also framed against the 3rd accused.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for Central Bureau of Investigation, in detail. Perused the order under challenge as well as the relevant provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 [hereinafter referred as ‘P.C. Act’ for short] and the Dakshina Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha Act, 1964 .
3. In this matter, the prosecution case is that, accused Nos.1, 3 and 4, who are the Treasurer, President and Secretary respectively of the Dakshin Bharath Hindi Prachar Sabha (Kerala), Chittoor road, Ernakulam and the second accused (a private person), in furtherance of the criminal conspiracy hatched between them, the first accused has received illegal gratification of Rs.4,00,
The court determined that the accused, as office-bearers of a Sabha receiving government funding, are public servants under the P.C. Act, thus subject to prosecution for corruption.
The definition of 'public servant' under the P.C.Act includes individuals performing public duties, which encompasses roles funded by government resources.
Prior sanction is mandatory for prosecuting public servants under the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 197 Cr.P.C.
Important points:Any grant or any aid at the time of establishment of the society or in any construction or in any structural concept or any aspect would be an aid-The term 'aid' has not been defined....
The court ruled that prior approval under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act is not required for investigating allegations of corruption in educational institutions, emphasizing the defi....
Public servant needs protection from prosecution under IPC only if acts are connected to official duties; lack of nexus and undue delay infringes the right to a speedy trial.
At the stage of framing charges, the court is required to evaluate whether there is a ground for presuming that the offence has been committed, without delving into the probative value of the materia....
The court affirmed that bank executives are public servants under the Prevention of Corruption Act, liable for prosecution for misconduct.
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
