Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Friday, Jan 04, 2008
ePaper
Google



Kerala
News: ePaper | Front Page | National | Tamil Nadu | Andhra Pradesh | Karnataka | Kerala | New Delhi | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous | Engagements |
Advts:
Retail Plus | Classifieds | Jobs | Obituary |

Kerala Printer Friendly Page   Send this Article to a Friend

Stay on trial in palmolein case extended

Legal Correspondent

Supreme Court lists it for final hearing in the last week of February


Special Leave Petition was filed by K. Karunakaran

SLP said decision to revive the case was ‘biased’


New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday extended the stay on all further proceedings in the trial against former Kerala Chief Minister K. Karunakaran in the palmolein import case registered in March 1997, for alleged offences under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act and the Indian Penal Code.

A Bench of Justice A.K. Mathur and Justice H.S. Bedi extended the stay on a special leave petition (SLP) filed by Mr. Karunakaran challenging a Kerala High Court order allowing the trial to proceed. The Bench directed that the matter be listed for final hearing in the last week of February.

Senior counsel K.K. Venugopal appeared for the petitioner and senior counsel Shanthi Bhushan, for Kerala State.

The High Court had by its order dated July 6, 2007 held that as the second government order (issued by the present government) reviving the case against Mr. Karunakaran was an executive one, no reasons were required to be enumerated. Further, as the public prosecutor did not file an application for the withdrawal of the case (as decided by the earlier Congress regime), as such, the government was entitled to rescind its earlier decision.

In his Special Leave Petition, Mr. Karunakaran said the impugned judgment was illegal, erroneous and unsustainable.

Mr. Karunakaran said the apex court in various rulings had repeatedly held that an order passed without ascribing reasons was vitiated by mala fides.

As regards the power of the government to rescind an earlier decision to withdraw the prosecution was concerned, it was a well-settled law that the government had the power to recommend for withdrawal of prosecution. Thereafter, the government would cease to have any further role in the process. It said the decision to revive the case was clearly a biased one, as the present Chief Minister had clearly indicated through his earlier decision his intention to prosecute the petitioner at all costs. The SLP sought quashing of the impugned judgment.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail



Kerala

News: ePaper | Front Page | National | Tamil Nadu | Andhra Pradesh | Karnataka | Kerala | New Delhi | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous | Engagements |
Advts:
Retail Plus | Classifieds | Jobs | Obituary | Updates: Breaking News |


News Update



The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription
Group Sites: The Hindu | The Hindu ePaper | Business Line | Business Line ePaper | Sportstar | Frontline | Publications | eBooks | Images | Home |

Copyright © 2008, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu