Chennai: Refusing the Applicant witnesses prosecution, Madras High Court on Friday allowed further investigation into the murder and theft cases in the former Plantation of the Minister of Kodanad Minister Jayalalithaa in April 2017, by saying that the deaths of the people connected to the incident were serious and suspicious.
‘”In this case, not only the murder and dakoity that has taken place in Kodaadu Tea Estate, it has been followed by serious and suspicious deaths,” Justice M Nirmal Kumar on Friday, refused to study at the Nilgiris session court.
And govern that no one can stop further investigations including chargesheet submissions.
The judge passed the order in the petition submitted by N Ravi, witness prosecution 35 in the trial, opposed further investigation and looked for the initial settlement of the trial that had reached the stage of the question.
This case has acquired the political tone after previously CM K.
Palaniswami said in the assembly that the effort was made to trap it in this case.
AIADMK also holds a walkout about this problem.
Nirmal Kumar’s justice, accessing advocate-general submission, objections and blames with.
“The tasks thrown into court are to see that there is the right investigation, fair, impartial and effective.
Archiving Sheeting sheets or Liah trials cannot prohibit further investigation, he added.
In part 173 (8) CRPC …
no.
Which can stop the investigation officer to continue further investigation after submitting the charge sheet when they find and get further evidence, “said the court.
“The object of a criminal trial is to find the truth and reasonable evidence must be brought to the note, whatever stage …
whatever material gathered, in the end the court concerned to decide on acceptance and the same.
It’s always better to have a fair trial And it is impartial to arrive at a fair decision, “Nirmal Kumar justice said.
The Petitioner’s locus, which is the Amma of the Office-Bearer Peravai, the Judge said: “The Petitioner is not a Defacto complainant, or the victim or the defendant.
He is only a witness in this case.
He did not say by the investigation and court of this case.
Furthermore, there is no prejudice What was caused by the applicant if further investigation was conducted.
“Reputed the fear of Ravi that further investigation of this case might delay the conclusion of the trial, the judge said:” The fair trial is the first necessity of the dispensation of justice and there are qualitative differences between the trials that are fast and fair.
“