Today 23.01.2020, WP.34845/18 & Crl.O.P.23428/18 Minister S P Velumani corruption allegation case filed by Arropor Iyyakam & R.S.Bharathi came up for hearing before justice M.Sathyanarayanan.J & R.Hemalatha.J in COURT HALL – 4. Directorate of Vigilance and Anti Corruption was represented by State Public Prosecutor Mr.A.Natarajan. Today State PP had filed the final status report along with the connected papers on behalf of the DVAC in a sealed cover.

Today 23.01.2020, WP.34845/18 & Crl.O.P.23428/18 Minister S P Velumani corruption allegation case filed by Arropor Iyyakam & R.S.Bharathi came up for hearing before justice M.Sathyanarayanan.J & R.Hemalatha.J in COURT HALL – 4. Directorate of Vigilance and Anti Corruption was represented by State Public Prosecutor Mr.A.Natarajan. Today State PP had filed the final status report along with the connected papers on behalf of the DVAC in a sealed cover. After go throughing the final status report, Justice Sathyanarayanan informed State PP Mr.A.Natarajan to commence his arguments regaring the scope of Preliminary Enquiry. State PP Mr.A.Natarajan made his elobare argument regarding the scope and ambit of preliminary enquiry. State PP relied on several judgements in which he drawed the attention of the court to the latest judgement of Hon’ble Supreme court in State of telangana -Vs- Sri Managipet decided by Hon’ble apex court on last month – December 2019 were it was clearly informed by the court that there is not set format to conduct an preliminary enquiry and it will depend upon each cases. State PP Mr.A.Natarajan argued that entire question raised by the court in answered regarding that 1. the scope of preliminary 2. how preliminary enquiry should be conducted 3.whether in preliminary enquiry full fledged investigation can be conducted, State PP Mr.A.Natarajan informed that all the judgments establishes that it is not wrong to conduct a prelimary enquiry like a full fleged investigation and he also informed that only when the investigation officer is satisfied that prima facie case is made out alone a regular case can be registered. Immediately Justice Sathyanarayanan questioned the State PP that is the ultimate decision lies only with the IO ? State PP informed ‘yes’ the ultimate decision regarding to find the prima facie offence made out or not lies only with investigation officer which the Hon’ble supreme court also say so. After making all his arguments regarding the scope of preliminary enquiry State PP asked the court permission to argue the merits of the case and also regarding as to whether Mr.Jayaram Venkatesh representing Arropor Iyyakam has the credential to file this PIL or not. After the arguments the case was posted to 17.2.2020 for further arguments by State PP Mr.A.Natarajan, AG, Mr.C S Vaidyanathan Senior Advocate for Corporation and Mr.ARL Sunderesan for Minister S P Velumani Case.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Call Now ButtonCALL ME