Chennai: In a large assistance to the suspended DGP-rank officers, facing a trial of sexual abuse cases in the complaint of the serving female IPS officers, the Supreme Court has issued the Madras High Court’s order who likes the daily trial under supervision.
Explain that the court court in Villupuram can continue according to the law ‘purely with his own ability without being influenced by any way’ by a series of orders passed by the High Court, Land Law and Justice Justice Ajay Rastogi said the cost (against DGP) can be framed by the court concerned in accordance with law and impure as a result of the direction issued by the High Court.
The bench also allowed the DGP team to withdraw its request to divert trials to other countries.
On August 2, the High Court had ordered a daily trial, and directed the court below to resolve the trial in six months without giving unnecessary delays.
Challenging the verdict, the DGP advisor suspected S Alambharathi An Abdul Saleem filed a petition to leave specifically at the Supreme Court.
Senior adviser to beat Rohatgi, representing DGP, argues that there is no opportunity and the need for a high court to take Suo Motu’s awareness and continue to monitor the progress of the problem.
It was only because of the high court order that the investigation body showed urgency and submitted a chargesheet in the shortest possible time.
DGP was placed under a suspension because of the high court order, he said, adding that the offer of officers to befall himself in this case was unsuccessful.
However, the senior government adviser Tamil Nadu Dushyant Dave said the High Court only monitored the investigation and did not guide him in a certain way.
The court court considers the recognition of an investigation based on the material placed before and not because of the direction of the High Court, he said.
Dave, however, ‘ready’ accepted it that important paragraphs (7 & 8) from a high court order might need ‘correct correction’.
(The identity of the victim has not been revealed to protect its privacy according to the direction of the Supreme Court about cases related to sexual violence)