Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A. BADHARUDEEN
K.S. Subhash S/o K. Sreedharan – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. allegations of conspiracy in tender process. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. clarification on tender processes and permissions. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 17 , 18) |
| 3. need for trial despite evidence of suspicion. (Para 14 , 19 , 21) |
| 4. decision to dismiss quashment request. (Para 22 , 24) |
ORDER :
1. The 3rd accused in C.C. No.2 of 2017 on the Court of the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Muvattupuzha has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking quashment of the entire proceedings as against him in the said case, arising out of Crime No.7/2013/EKM of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau, Ernakulam.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor, in detail. Perused the relevant materials available.
3. In this case, the prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under Sections 13 (1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 [hereinafter referred as ‘P.C. Act’ for short] and under Section 120 (B) of the Indian Penal Code, by accused Nos.1 to 4, who are the UD Clerk, Superintendent, Town Planning Officer and one Raghuvaran, who was given tender during the year 2011 to erect
The court held that strong suspicion of involvement in corruption necessitates trial, and quashing proceedings is not warranted based on innocence arguments.
The court ruled that mere allegations without evidence of fraudulent inducement do not establish the offense of cheating under IPC, warranting quashing of charges.
The court emphasized that the writ petition and any arbitration award will not be considered as evidence in the trial, and directed the trial court to expedite the trial.
At the stage of considering charges, the accused cannot rely on materials by way of defense, and the power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure cannot be used for a mini trial.
The need for a demand or request for a valuable thing or pecuniary advantage from the public servant to establish an offence under Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
Participation in a conspiracy to obfuscate criminal activity can result in liability, even without direct involvement in the initial crime, based on prima facie evidence of culpability.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of a reasonable connection between the act and the official duty for the application of Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedu....
Point of law: when the materials relied upon by a party are required to be proved., no infererwe can be drawn on the basis of those materials to conclude the complaint to be unacceptable. The Court s....
Point of law: Prevention of corruption - where the public servant had abused the office, which he held in the check-up period, but had ceased to hold "that office" or was holding a different office, ....
Dismissal of discharge petition confirmed due to prima facie evidence of conspiracy and misappropriation involving public servants.
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
