Kerala HC Issues Notice to Digi Yatra Foundation in PIL Seeking Strict Compliance with DPDP Act 2023 for Airport Passenger Data: High Court of Kerala
07 Mar 2026
Appointment to Higher Post on Compassionate Grounds Not a Matter of Right: J&K&L High Court
07 Mar 2026
Nearly Decade-Long Delay in Patnitop Illegal Construction PIL Appalls J&K&L High Court; Directs PDA CEO to Join Proceedings
07 Mar 2026
Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Anticipatory Bail in Murder via Humiliation Case: Sections 103(1) & 3(5) BNS
07 Mar 2026
Employees Under CCS Pension Rules Excluded from PG Act Section 2(e) Gratuity: Delhi HC Upholds Forfeiture on Resignation
07 Mar 2026
Security Deposit Forfeiture Without Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Himachal Pradesh High Court
07 Mar 2026
S.202 CrPC Inquiry Not Mandatory for Public Servant Complaints If Accused Outside Jurisdiction: Supreme Court
09 Mar 2026
Professor MP Singh: Shaper of Constitutional Discourse
09 Mar 2026
CJI Kant: Action Needed for More Women Judges
10 Mar 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Mr. Justice P.Velmurugan, J
State represented by The Public Prosecutor – Appellant
Versus
R.Leelavathi W/o.Paul Gunasekaran – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
ORDER :
P. Velmurugan, J.
All these criminal revisions have been filed by the State against the order of the learned Special Judge, Special Court for the Cases under Prevention of Corruption Act, Chennai, whereby, the petitioners and the other accused were discharged from the case against them in C.C.No.84 of 2011.
2 Originally, P.R.Sundaram, Member of Legislative Assembly, Government of Tamilnadu, presented a complaint before the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Chennai, on 21.11.2000 against Pulavar Senguttuvan, Former Minister of Animal Husbandry and nine others. On the directions issued by the Court, preliminary enquiry was conducted and report was submitted on 14.03.2001. After finalising the report, the same was sent to Government seeking concurrence. In the meantime, the learned Principal Sessions Judge, by an order dated 17.07.2003, directed the Director of Vigilance & Anti-Corruption, Chennai, to register a regular case and proceed further based on the complaint given by said P.R.Sundaram.
2.1 Therefore a case in Cr.No.3/AC/22003/
The court held that defects in sanction do not invalidate prosecution under the Prevention of Corruption Act, and the existence of conspiracy must be evaluated during trial.
Public servants can be charged with conspiracy and misappropriation for fraudulent actions under specific schemes without a need for prior sanction after retirement, if substantial evidence supports ....
The judgment established that the absence of sanction can be raised at the inception and at the threshold as it goes to the root of the matter. It also emphasized that the validity or illegality of t....
Prosecution of public servants for corruption does not require sanction when actions are not related to official duties.
The competent authority to grant sanction for prosecution of an IAS officer is the Central Government under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The Competent Authority cannot review its earlier decision to refuse sanction without fresh materials, and there is a distinction between absence of sanction and alleged invalidity on account of non-....
The Magistrate has the power to direct further investigation under Section 173(8) of the CrPC, and such powers can be exercised suo moto as well.
Accused in corruption case failed to demonstrate grounds for discharge; sufficient evidence warranted trial regarding conspiracy and fraud in loan sanctioning.
At the stage of framing charges, the court is required to evaluate the material on record to determine whether there is a ground for presuming that the offence has been committed, and not whether a g....
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.