High CourtsSingle Bench(2023) 02 KL CK 0117

Mohammed Kunju C.U vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 8 February 2023

HON’BLE JUDGES
Dr. Kauser Edappagath, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (CRL.) NO. 633 Of 2022

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 289 words

Dr. Kauser Edappagath, J

1.

The petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.15/2020 on the file of the Court of Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Muvattupuzha. He is aged 73 years. As seen from the medical records produced, he is suffering from various ailments. The petitioner was working as Joint RTO, RTO and Deputy Transport Commissioner in various offices of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Department during the period from 1.4.1993 to 31.7.2003.

2.

The prosecution allegation is that, the petitioner acquired wealth disproportionate to his source of income to the tune of ₹63,60,276.74 in his name and in the name of his family and thereby committed the offence punishable under Section 13(1)(e) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

3.

According to the petitioner, the investigating agency did not calculate his wealth correctly. His wealth was calculated without taking into consideration the inherited property belonging to his sister and his wife. It is also alleged that the children of the petitioner are also working at that point of time which was also not considered by the investigating agency. When the petitioner noticed the above fact, he submitted a detailed representation to the Director of Vigilance/3rd respondent on 13.6.2022. Ext.P1 is the said representation. The limited prayer of the petitioner is to give a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider Ext.P1 representation and if found necessary, direct further investigation.

4.

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner Sri.S. Rajeev and Sri. A. Rajesh, the learned Special Public Prosecutor, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of with a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider Ext.P1 representation and act in accordance with law.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.