Disposed

B.Krishnakumar v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Jul 2019Crl.Rev.Pet/1042/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a revision petition seeking discharge. It held that the validity of prosecution sanction depended on the competent authority for removing the accused from KSEB service. The High Court remanded the matter, directing the trial court to examine KSEB rules and regulations to determine the specific competent authority.

What did the court decide?

Revision petition disposed of with direction to trial court to examine KSEB Rules to identify the competent authority to remove the petitioner from service before deciding on discharge.

B.Krishnakumar Vs State of Kerala — Corruption | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JULY 2019 / 20TH ASHADHA, 1941

¶5

Crl.Rev.Pet.No.1042 of 2017

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRL.M.P. 1379/2016 IN CC 46/2010 of ENQUIRY COMMISSIONER & SPECIAL JUDGE, KOTTAYAM DATED 07-08-2017

¶7

CRIME NO.1/2005 OF VACB, KOTTAYAM , Kottayam

¶8

REVISION PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶9

B.KRISHNAKUMAR

¶10

AGED 53 YEARS, S/O.BALAKRISHNAN, PERUMATHRIKOVIL VARIYATHU PADINJARE NADA, VAIKOM VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM (FORMER CASHIER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, K.S.E.B. NATTAKOM, KOTTAYAM)

¶11

BY ADVS. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) SRI.NANDAGOPAL S.KURUP

¶12

RESPONDENT/S:

¶13

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERANKULAM THROUGH THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, VIGILANCE AND ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU, KOTTAYAM.

¶14

SRI A RAJESH -SPL PP VACB

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11.07.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

Crl.Rev.Pet.No.1042 of 2017

¶17

¶18

ORDER

¶19

The petitioner herein is the sole accused in C.C

¶20

46/2010 of the Special Court (Vigilance)Kottayam involving the offence under Section 13(1)(c) & (d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and under Sections 409,465 and 477A I.P.C. He filed an application as Crl.M.P No.1379/2016 before the trial court for discharge under Section 239 Cr.P.C.

¶21

After hearing both sides, the learned trial

¶22

Judge dismissed the application on 7.8.2017. The

¶23

said order is under challenge in this revision brought by the accused.

¶24

On going through the impugned order and the

¶25

other materials, I find that the main contention raised by the revision petitioner to claim discharge is that the prosecution sanction under Section 19 of

¶26

the P.C Act was not granted by the competent

¶27

authority. The sanction was admittedly granted by the

¶28

Chief Engineer of the Human Resources Wing of the

¶29

Kerala State Electricity Board. The petitioner was a

¶30

Cashier of the Kerala State Electricity Board. The

¶31

crucial question is who is competent to remove the

¶32

Crl.Rev.Pet.No.1042 of 2017

¶33

¶34

petitioner from service. This will have to be examined thoroughly to decide whether the prosecution sanction obtained by the VACB in this case is proper and legal. This was examined in the trial court, but it appears that all the relevant aspects of the issue were not examined by the trial court. I find that the matter requires thorough examination as part of trial. Of course, the factual aspects also will have to be thoroughly examined to find whether the petitioner had in fact misappropriated any amount from the funds of

¶35

the K.S.E.B, and whether he had made any undue benefit or illegal advantage by misusing or abusing his position as Cashier. These are all matters to be examined during trial. I find that giving liberty to the petitioner to raise all the legal aspects of the matter before the trial court during trial, this revision can be disposed of. The trial court is directed to examine the provisions relating to the appointment of various staff of the KSEB, the removal of the staff, the provisions dealing with disciplinary action against the staff, and also the competent authority to remove various categories of staff of the KSEB from service. After thoroughly examining the KSEB Rules and Regulations, the trial

¶36

Crl.Rev.Pet.No.1042 of 2017

¶37

¶38

court will have to find out whether the right authority to remove the petitioner from service is the Chief Engineer or the KSEB itself, or whether the KSEB has delegated the powers of disciplinary action to any subordinate officer. Giving such a direction to the trial court and also giving liberty to the petitioner to raise all these aspects before the trial court during trial, this revision petition is disposed of. It is also clarified that decision shall be taken at the trial court on the legal and factual aspects uninfluenced by the observations earlier made for taking decision on the request for discharge.

¶39

¶40

Crl.Rev.Pet.No.1042 of 2017

¶41

¶42

APPENDIX

¶43

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶44

ANNEXURE A1: TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN C.C. 46/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE ENQUIRY COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL JUDGE, KOTTAYAM.

¶45

ANNEXURE A2: TRUE COPY OF THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD EMPLOYEES DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS (CONDUCT OF ENQUIRY) REGULATIONS, 1974

¶46

ANNEXURE A3: TRUE COPY OF THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD EMPLOYEES (CLASSIFICATION, CONTROL AND APPEAL) REGULATIONS.

¶47

ANNEXURE A4: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 10.7.2017 ISSUED BY THE CHIEF ENGINEER (HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT) TO DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, VACB, KOTTAYAM

¶48

/TRUE COPY/

¶49

P.S TO JUDGE

B.Krishnakumar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B.Krishnakumar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Joostar Mascreen Vs Johny Fernandez and Another

Joostar Mascreen Vs Johny Fernandez

Jayadhar v. Vs Santhosh D. Puthen Veettil

Satheesan K.P. Vs State of Kerala

P.K.Firos, Vs the State of Kerala

S.K.S.Yadav Vs the Superintendent of Police, Cbi/Spe, Kochi Unit