Absence of Videography Alone Not Sufficient For Bail When Custody is Less Than a Year: Delhi High Court Refuses Bail in Commercial Quantity Heroin Use of Permitted Synthetic Colour in Dal Masur Still Constitutes Adulteration: Punjab & Haryana High Court Uphold Conviction Penalty Must Not Result in Civil Death of Professionals: Delhi High Court Reduces Two-Year Suspension of Insolvency Professional, Citing Disproportionate Punishment Right of Cross-Examination is Statutory, Cannot Be Denied When Documents Are Exhibited Later: Chhattisgarh High Court Allows Re-Cross-Examination Compounding after Adjudication is Impermissible under FEMA: Calcutta High Court Declines Post-Adjudication Compounding Plea Tears of a Child Speak Louder Than Words: Bombay HC Confirms Life Term for Man Who Raped 4-Year-Old Alleged Dowry Death After Forced Remarriage: Allahabad High Court Finds No Evidence of Strangulation or Demand “Even If Executant Has No Title, Registrar Must Register the Document If Formalities Are Met” — Supreme Court  Declares Tamil Nadu's Rule 55A(i) Ultra Vires the Registration Act, 1908 Res Judicata Is Not Optional – It’s Public Policy: Supreme Court Slams SEBI for Passing Second Final Order in Fraud Case Against Vital Communications Ltd A Person Has Died… Insurance Company Cannot Escape Liability Without Proving Policy Violation: Supreme Court Slams High Court for Exonerating Insurer in Fatal Accident Case Calling Someone by Caste Name Is Not Enough – It Must Be Publicly Done to Attract SC/ST Act: Supreme Court Acquits All in Jharkhand Land Dispute Case Broken Promises Don’t Make Rape – Mature Adults in Long-Term Relationships Must Accept Responsibility: Supreme Court Quashes Rape Case Against NRI Man Every Broken Relationship Can’t Be Branded Rape: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Retired Judge Accused of Sexual Exploitation on Promise of Marriage No Evidence, No Motive, Not Even Proof of Murder: Supreme Court Slams Conviction, Acquits Man Accused of Killing Wife After Two Years of Marriage You Can’t Assume Silence Is Consent: Supreme Court Sends Back ₹46 Lakh Insurance Dispute to NCDRC for Fresh Determination “Voyage Must Start and End Before Monsoon Sets In — But What If That’s Practically Impossible?” SC Rules Against Insurance Company in Shipping Dispute No Criminal Case Can Be Built on a Land Deal That’s Three Decades Old Without Specific Allegations: Supreme Court Upholds Quashing of FIR Against Ex-JK Housing Chief Just Giving a Call for Protest Doesn’t Make One Criminally Liable - Rail Roko Protest Quashed Against KCR Ex-CM: Telangana High Court Ends 13-Year-Old Proceedings for 2011 Telangana Agitation This Is Not a Case of Greed Simplicitor but a Celebration of Fraud: Karnataka High Court Grants Specific Performance, Slams Vendor for Violating Court Orders Limitation Period Under Section 18-A of Rent Act Mandatory, Delay Not Condonable – Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds NRI Landlord's Eviction Against Tenant Custom Department Cannot Revive Time-Barred Show Cause Notices After Seven Years Without Jurisdiction: Gujarat High Court Quashes Customs Notices to JBS Exports Public Property Cannot Be Managed Privately for Decades — Fair Price Shops in Hospitals Must Be Allotted by Auction: Jammu & Kashmir High Court Registered Sale Deed Alone Does Not Dismantle Prior Security Interest: Gauhati High Court Rejects Buyer’s Writ Against SARFAESI Action, Cites Expanded Statutory Definition Old OBC Certificates Won’t Work — Supreme Court Says Cut-Off Date Is Final in Rajasthan Civil Judge Exams

No Evidence of Pecuniary Gain or Dishonest Intention: Kerala High Court Quashed Corruption Charges Against Port Officials

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Kerala, presided over by Mr. Justice K. Babu, has quashed all charges against C. Surendranath and Hari Achutha Varrier, officials implicated in the V.C No.1/2015 case registered by the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau, Kasaragod. The case, which involved allegations of criminal misconduct in a tender process for manual dredging and sale of port sand, was dismissed due to a lack of evidence pointing to any criminal intent or pecuniary advantage gained by the accused.

Justice K. Babu, in his judgment, stated, "There is absolutely no allegation in the prosecution case that the petitioners obtained any pecuniary advantage." This observation played a crucial role in the decision to quash the proceedings against the two port officials. The court emphasized the importance of establishing a dishonest intention to prove criminal misconduct under Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

The petitioners were accused of showing undue favor to certain co-operative societies during the tendering process. However, their counsel successfully argued that there was no material evidence indicating that the petitioners obtained any financial gain or caused any loss to the government. They contended that the alleged irregularities in the tender process did not constitute criminal misconduct.

In response, the prosecution had argued that the societies involved in the case were permitted to participate in the tender despite lacking qualifications, indicating a conspiracy among the petitioners and other accused. However, the court found these allegations insufficient to establish a prima facie case of corruption or conspiracy.

The court further referenced several key cases, including 'Bhagwan Swarup Lal Bishan Lal v. State of Maharashtra' and 'Zakia Ahsan Jafri v. State of Gujarat', to reinforce the legal principles guiding its decision.

 Date of Decision: 17th January 2024

Surendranath VS State of Kerala 

 

Similar News