106th Day Of Lockdown

Maharashtra2237241231929448 Tamil Nadu118594711161636 Delhi102831742173165 Gujarat37636267441978 Uttar Pradesh2996819627313 Telangana2761216287313 Karnataka2681511100417 West Bengal2383715790804 Rajasthan2140416575472 Andhra Pradesh211979745252 Haryana1799913645279 Madhya Pradesh1562711768622 Bihar12525933898 Assam12523833016 Odisha10097670354 Jammu and Kashmir89315399143 Punjab67494554175 Kerala5895345228 Chhatisgarh3415272814 Uttarakhand3230262143 Jharkhand3018210422 Goa190311568 Tripura171612481 Manipur14307710 Himachal Pradesh107876410 Puducherry104351714 Nagaland6443030 Chandigarh4924017 Arunachal Pradesh270922 Mizoram1971390 Sikkim125650 Meghalaya94432
Nation Current Affairs 10 Nov 2016 Cash-for-vote case: ...

Cash-for-vote case: Arguments continue on Naidu’s petition continue

DECCAN CHRONICLE.
Published Nov 10, 2016, 2:03 am IST
Updated Nov 10, 2016, 7:36 am IST
The judge wondered how, despite knowing the fact of pendency of the investigation of the other accused in the case.
Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu
 Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu

Hyderabad: The Hyderabad High Court on Wednesday asked P. Sudhakar Reddy, counsel appearing for YSR Congress MLA Alla Ramakrishna Reddy in the cash-for-vote case, how he would justify the order of the special ACB Court under Section 156 (3) of the CrPC in a complaint under Section 210 Cr PC.

Justice T. Sunil Chowdary, while hearing a criminal petition by AP Chief Minister N. Chandrababu Naidu challenging an order passed by the ACB Court ordering a probe into the role of other accused in the case, asked Mr Sudhakar Reddy whether the special court has the power to issue an order when there was no specific plea from the complaint for granting the order.

 

The judge wondered how, despite knowing the fact of pendency of the investigation of the other accused in the case, and also the fact of filing of charge sheet against some of the accused, did the special court grant the order without going into the facts of the case. Counsel replied that the order of the special court was only an administrative order and not a judicial order.

Claiming that the order of the special court was not an illegal order, he declared his arguments concluded. On Tuesday, Mr Sudhakar Reddy had told the court that there was no need of issuing an FIR against the petitioner in the case based on the order issued by a Special ACB Court under Section 156(3) of the CrPC on the complaint of Mr Ramakrishna Reddy. The judge posted the case to Monday for the arguments of ACB.

...




ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT