Chennai: Madras High Court will provide its verdict on the request for a further investigation into cases related to the murder and theft at Kodanad Estate, a former minister’s summer retreat J Jayalithaa in Nilgiris, on August 27.
Kumar Nollal, after listening to the Animation Argument of Advocates – General Tamil Nadu R Shunmugasundam and two other senior advice, conducted a verdict on Tuesday.
“This problem should not be used for other purposes, it is my only concern,” said the judge.
This problem relates to the petition submitted by witnesses of prosecution, N Ravi, looking for daily hearing in the case and the initial conclusion of the trial at the Nilgiris session court.
Allahing worry, advocate-general Shunmugasundaram confirmed the police investigation held with a key that still lived in the suspect KV Sayan, and said: “We will eventually put the truth.
We have no intention of slandering anyone.” Called any motives behind the investigation.
Furthermore in this case, AG said it was a promise of promise to the powerful DMK.
“The government has promised to find a logical conclusion in this case.
We have no intention of hurting anyone.” Shunmugasundaram said Section 173 (8) CRPC did not determine that previous permission from the judge was needed to begin further investigation.
“The provisions are stated that the previous permit must be sought for further investigation,” he said.
The investigative officer only tasked to notify the court and look for formal permits.
They are not mandated to get permission, AG clarify.
Previously, representing Ravi, senior advocate I Subramaniam argued that the police had begun further investigation in this case even without his personal consent of the judge concerned.
“The Supreme Court has explained that previous agreement is a must to start further investigation,” he said.
Supporting his argument, former Advocate General A L Somayaji said further investigation could be permitted only until the trial began in this case.
“In this case, the trial has begun.
Therefore, there are no questions about giving permission for further investigation,” he said.
There is a case of the prime facie for the court to remain further investigation, he added.