Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J
K.Sivamani – Appellant
Versus
State represented by, The Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. implications of procedural errors and document necessity. (Para 1 , 2 , 4) |
| 2. prosecution's role in ensuring fair trial and transparency. (Para 6 , 10) |
| 3. court's reaffirmation of the accused's rights to necessary evidence. (Para 12 , 18) |
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to set aside the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.753 of 2023 in C.C.No.6 of 2016 dated 19.09.2023 on the file of the Special Court for Cases under the Prevention of Corruption Act at Chennai, dismissing the petition filed by the petitioner under Section 91 of Cr.P.C.
2. The brief facts of the case is that the respondent Police has registered a case against the petitioner and 5 others for the offence under Sections 13(1)(d), 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act r/w 109 of IPC, in which, the petitioner is arrayed as A1, who is facing trial in C.C.No.6 of 2016, pending on the file of the Special Court for Cases under the Prevention of Corruption Act at Chennai. The prosecution has examined as many as 32 witnesses and marked 54 documents and closed the evidence during March 2023.
3. During trial, the first Investigation Officer namely Kumaragurubaran, Inspector of Police, who was ex
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
