SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2010 Supreme(MP) 786

ABHAY M.NAIK, BRIJ KISHORE DUBE
Harish Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Abhay M. Naik, J.

1. This writ appeal has been preferred against an order dated 17-9-2008 passed in W.P. No. 4308/08 by the learned Single Judge of this Court holding thereby that Lokayukta has jurisdiction to enquire the cases against the Petitioner/Appellant under the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

2. Short facts involved herein are that Appellant is working as Tahsil Coordinator (Tahsil Sanyojak) in Gram Raksha Samiti, Gwalior. On receipt of complaint against him, Lokayukta set up a preliminary enquiry at Case No. 4/2008 on 9-7-2008. An FIR at Crime No. 23/2008 has been registered against the Petitioner/Appellant under Sections 13(1)(e) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. W.P. No. 4308/08 was submitted on the ground that the Petitioner is not a public servant and this being so, Lokayukta has no jurisdiction to hold enquiry against him. Accordingly, enquiry proceedings and consequent FIR stand vitiated.

3. Learned Single Judge held that the Petitioner is a public servant as defined in M.P. Lokayukt Evam Up-Lokayukt Adhiniyam, 1981 and accordingly Lokayukt has jurisdiction to enquire cases relating to Prevention of Corruption Act against th













































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top