Disposed

K.Srinivasan, v. State Rep. by Its

Madras HC22 Mar 2018CRL OP/8629/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought directions to the Special Judge for Vigilance and Anti-Corruption to issue a final report under Section 482 CrPC. Court directed petitioner to make a fresh application before the Special Court after collecting requisite fee.

What did the court decide?

Directed petitioner to make a fresh application for the final report before the Special Court for Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Tiruchirapalli, after collecting requisite fee.

K.Srinivasan, Vs State Rep. by Its — Corruption | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 22.03.2018

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.8629 of 2018

¶6

K.Srinivasan ... Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

1 State rep by its
Director Vigilance and Anti-Corruption,
Tamil Nadu
Chennai-600 028.
2 The Inspector of Police,
Vigilance and Anti Corruption,
Trichirapalli ... Respondents
Prayer: Criminal original petition filed under Section 482 of
Criminal Procedure Code, praying for direction to direct the
learned Special Judge for Vigilance and Anti Corruption,
Tiruchirapalli to issue the final report in Crime No.6 of 2015
filed by the second respondent to the petitioner.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Vivekananthan For Respondents : Mr.K.Prabakar Additional Public Prosecutor ORDER

¶10

This petition is filed seeking direction of this Court to direct the Special Judge for Vigilance and Anti Corruption, Tiruchirapalli to issue final report in crime No.6 of 2015. Since the petitioner is the Defacto complainant and the second respondent has filed Closure Report before the Trial Court.

¶11

2 After serving RC notice to the petitioner to file protest petition, the petitioner requires final report. Hence, the petitioner has applied for a copy of the final report and the documents filed along with final report.

¶12

3 The Trial Court initially returned the application since the cause title not properly mentioned. The second application was also returned to be filed along with third party application.

¶13

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶14

4 The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that final report has been filed before the Special Court for Vigilance and Anti Corruption, Tiruchirapalli. The Investigation agency has no objection for furnishing the copy to the Defacto complainant.

¶15

5 Recording the same, the petitioner is hereby directed to make a fresh application for the final report before the Special Court for Vigilance and Anti Corruption, Tiruchirapalli. On such application, copy may be furnished to the petitioner after collecting requisite fee.

¶16

6 With this above direction, this Criminal Original
Petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
Asst.Registrar (CCC)
/true copy/
Sub Asst. Registrar
rpl
To
1 The Special Judge for Vigilance and Anti Corruption,
Tiruchirapalli
2 Director Vigilance and Anti-Corruption,
Tamil Nadu
Chennai-600 028.
3 The Inspector of Police,
Vigilance and Anti Corruption,
Trichirapalli
4 The Public Prosecutor ,
High Court, Madras.
+1cc to Mr.R.Vivekananthan, Advocate sr.no.21581
Crl.O.P.No.8629 of 2018
nr 09/04/2018

¶17

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

K.Srinivasan, v. State Rep. by Its

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Srinivasan, v. State Rep. by Its

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

P.Vekatachalapathy, M/52 Yrs Vs the Joint Director

Priyanath Misra Vs the Additional Superintendent

L. Sairam Vs A.N. Muthusamy (Died)

M.Nagaraj Vs the Inspector of Police

M.Velu, Aged 44 Years, Vs the Director

Y.Akbar Ahmed Vs the Director of Vigilance and