Preliminary probe prevents frivolous complaints: DVAC
TNN | Dec 19, 2019, 04.15 AM IST
Chennai: The Madras high court on Wednesday wondered why Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) is conducting a full-fledged probe into the graft complaint against local administration minister S P Velumani, examining more than 100 witnesses in the preliminary inquiry to ascertain whether prima facie case is made out to file an FIR.
Can such a detailed probe can be conducted in the preliminary inquiry, a division bench of Justices M Sathyanarayanan and R Hemalatha asked advocate-general Vijay Narayan and public prosecutor A Natarajan, who represented the state and DVAC respectively. To this, Natarajan said the object of such preliminary inquiry itself is to safeguard public servants from frivolous complaints. If prima facie case is made out, FIR would be registered, he added.
The issue pertains to complaints made by DMK and Arappor Iyakkam to DVAC alleging corruption by Velumani in awarding contracts of corporations in the state. As the DVAC failed to act upon the plaints, they moved the high court seeking direction to the agency to file an FIR based on their complaints.
When the pleas came up for hearing, senior counsel N R Elango for DMK alleged that DVAC is adopting such tactics only to drag the issue. When the governor is the sanctioning authority to permit probe against a public servant, DVAC has sought permission from the chief secretary with an intention to subvert the investigation later, he said. Relying on the the Supreme Court’s judgment in the Lalithakumari case, he argued that preliminary inquiry is only for the purpose of finding out whether any cognizable offence is made out and not to conduct a full-fledged investigation. Recording the submissions, the bench asked Vijay Narayan to answer by January 7 on who is the competent authority to grant sanction to conduct probe against public servants and whether the preliminary inquiry is conducted as per DVAC manual or directions of the Supreme Court.
TNN | Dec 19, 2019, 04.15 AM IST
Chennai: The Madras high court on Wednesday wondered why Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) is conducting a full-fledged probe into the graft complaint against local administration minister S P Velumani, examining more than 100 witnesses in the preliminary inquiry to ascertain whether prima facie case is made out to file an FIR.
Can such a detailed probe can be conducted in the preliminary inquiry, a division bench of Justices M Sathyanarayanan and R Hemalatha asked advocate-general Vijay Narayan and public prosecutor A Natarajan, who represented the state and DVAC respectively. To this, Natarajan said the object of such preliminary inquiry itself is to safeguard public servants from frivolous complaints. If prima facie case is made out, FIR would be registered, he added.
The issue pertains to complaints made by DMK and Arappor Iyakkam to DVAC alleging corruption by Velumani in awarding contracts of corporations in the state. As the DVAC failed to act upon the plaints, they moved the high court seeking direction to the agency to file an FIR based on their complaints.
When the pleas came up for hearing, senior counsel N R Elango for DMK alleged that DVAC is adopting such tactics only to drag the issue. When the governor is the sanctioning authority to permit probe against a public servant, DVAC has sought permission from the chief secretary with an intention to subvert the investigation later, he said. Relying on the the Supreme Court’s judgment in the Lalithakumari case, he argued that preliminary inquiry is only for the purpose of finding out whether any cognizable offence is made out and not to conduct a full-fledged investigation. Recording the submissions, the bench asked Vijay Narayan to answer by January 7 on who is the competent authority to grant sanction to conduct probe against public servants and whether the preliminary inquiry is conducted as per DVAC manual or directions of the Supreme Court.
No comments:
Post a Comment