AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
14 paragraphs · 225 wordsR. Narayana Pisharadi, J
The petitioner is the first accused in the case registered as VC No.09/15/SIU-II of VACB, SIU-II, Thiruvananthapuram. This petition is filed by him
for quashing Annexure-A first information report registered against him.
When the case came up for hearing today, learned Public Prosecutor submitted that a refer report has been filed by the investigating officer in the
trial court and a statement to that effect is filed before this Court.
The statement filed by the investigating officer reads as follows:
“It is respectfully submitted that a Vigilance Case in VC09/2015/SIU-II, U/s.13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 was registered on the
strength of a Quick Verification Report No.11/13/SIU-II. The FIR was registered by Shri.R.D.Ajith, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance & Anti-Corruption
Bureau, Special Investigation Unit-II on 09.12.2015 and the investigation was carried out by the officers from time to time. The investigation was completed by
Shri.V.T.Rasith, Inspector of Police and the refer report was submitted before the Court of Enquiry Commissioner & Special Judge (Vigilance), Thiruvananthapuram
on 09.02.2021. The trial court accepted the refer report and the case was posted on 10.09.2021.â€
In view of the above statement filed by the investigating officer, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Crl.M.C can be dismissed as
infructuous.
Consequently, this Crl.M.C is dismissed as infructuous.