Skip to main content

Supreme Court issues Show-Cause Notice to convict for misleading it to get favourable order

 The Supreme Court has issued a Show-Cause Notice to a convict for misleading it by producing a wrong copy of a trial court's verdict to get a favourable order which had allowed him to walk free on payment of a fine only in a graft case.


The Top Court, while issuing the Notice to convict S Shankar, asked him why it should not recall the order sparing him the jail term and take "further suitable" action for the act of misleading it.


The SC, had on July 23, 2019, allowed Shankar to walk free in the corruption case on payment of ₹1,000 after his Lawyer argued that the Andhra Pradesh High Court "wrongly construed" the operative portion of the judgement of a trial court delivered in the year 2000.


It was argued the trial court had not awarded a jail term of one year to Shankar but had only imposed a fine of ₹1,000 for offences of criminal breach of trust and conspiracy under the IPC and some other charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act.


"Since we find that the trial court had merely imposed a sentence of payment of fine of ₹1,000 on the appellant, the judgment of the high court is clarified accordingly. In view of the above, the appeal stands disposed of, making it clear that no sentence of imprisonment was imposed on Accused No. 5 (Shankar) … by the trial court and the high court…," the top court had ordered, granting the relief.

However, a subsequent inquiry and a report of the secretary general of the apex court indicated that prima facie, the convict "misled" the bench to avoid a jail term.


"After perusal of the report submitted by the Secretary General of the Supreme Court, we are satisfied that the appellant – S Shankar misled this court by producing wrong copy of the judgment dated December 31, 2000 passed by the Special Judge for CBI Cases, Hyderabad."


"Let, therefore, show-cause notice be issued to the appellant – S Shankar as to why order dated July 23, 2019, passed by this court, be not recalled and modified, and further suitable action be not taken against him," a bench comprising of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Aniruddha Bose said.

Venkateswara Rao Anumolu, advocate-on-record, accepted the show-cause notice on behalf of Shankar and was granted time of four weeks to respond.


"The Registry is directed to supply a copy of the report submitted by the learned Secretary General of the Supreme Court to the state counsel. List the matter thereafter," it ordered.


Shankar had filed an appeal in the top court in the graft case against the high court's verdict confirming the judgment of the trial court.

Shankar was convicted along with others in the graft case for various offences, including the criminal breach of trust, conspiracy and corrupt practices. He was awarded a year in jail, and a fine of ₹1,000 was also imposed.


The top court termed as justified the submissions of Shankar's lawyer that "he was only sentenced to pay a fine of ₹500 on each count, thus totalling ₹1,000­, and in default to undergo one month's simple imprisonment".


"No sentence of imprisonment was passed against him. The appellant herein has already paid the fine imposed upon him. He is not interested in pursuing this appeal," it said.

The Top Court had disposed of his appeal, which has now been re-opened after the inquiry.

.

LEXIS AND COMPANY

"ADVOCATES AND LEGAL CONSULTANTS"

We are India’s Leading Law Firm

“The firm has always strives to create and implement innovative and effective methods of providing cost-effective, quality representation and services for our clients and will continue to meet and exceed the expectations of our valued clients.”


–    DR ANUPAM KUMAR MISHRA (ADVOCATE, FOUNDER-LEXIS AND COMPANY).


Get in Touch


LEXIS AND COMPANY.

C/O: DR ANUPAM KUMAR MISHRA.

OFFICE: A1B/26, JANAKPURI, GROUND FLOOR,

NEW DELHI,, DELHI, 110058.

INDIA.

lexisandcompany@gmail.com

CALL: +91-9830333388.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

LAW INTERNSHIP AND TRAINEE OPPORTUNITY

  LAW INTERNSHIP AND TRAINEE OPPORTUNITY: LEXIS AND COMPANY, renowned for its excellence in the legal field, is thrilled to announce an exceptional internship and trainee opportunity for aspiring final year law students and newly enrolled Advocates. This highly coveted internship  and trainee opportunity  is a paid position, providing a remarkable platform for career growth and experiential learning in a corporate environment. Eligibility: Only for final year Students and Newly Enrolled Advocates. We are offering a limited number of vacancies, designed for law students and newly enrolled advocates in the dynamic world of the legal profession. This is an immediate joining opportunity, available to candidates who are interested to work in the area of commercial and civil litigation and have interest towards drafting, and legal research. As a team member at  LEXIS AND COMPANY,  you will refine your research and drafting skills while witnessing the meticulous professional conduct expected

Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1)

   Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1) --- PLEASE READ THE COMPLETE JOB DESCRIPTION BEFORE APPLYING ---   Urgent Hiring for: LAW STUDENTS/CS STUDENTS/ FRESHER LAW GRADUATES/ FRESHER CS. Position: Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1) Department: Legal. Firm Name: LEXIS AND COMPANY – LAW FIRM. Location: Janakpuri, New Delhi. CTC: RS 5000/- Per Month. Additional Allowance: All official expenses including travelling allowance for official purposes will be paid from the day 1 of the service with the firm.   We are urgently looking for LAW STUDENTS / CS STUDENTS / FRESHER LAW GRADUATES / FRESHER CS for the position of Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1) for our Law Firm in Janakpuri, New Delhi.   Eligibility: Mandatory Qualification: Any LAW STUDENTS / CS STUDENTS / FRESHER LAW GRADUATES / FRESHER CS who wants to learn as a beginner. Desired Qualification: Any additional qualification  will be pre

The Doctrine of Alternative Danger

  THE DOCTRINE OF ALTERNATIVE DANGER Although the plaintiff is supposed to be cautious in spite of the defendant’s Negligence, there can also be certain situations when the plaintiff is justified in taking some threat where some unsafe state of affairs has been created by way of the defendant. The plaintiff may appear as puzzled or worried through a hazardous state of affairs created via the defendant and to store his man or woman or property, or now and again to store a third party from such danger, he may take a choice risk. The law, therefore, lets in the plaintiff to come across a choice danger to shop by himself from the chance created via the defendant. If the path adopted by him results in some harm to himself, his motion in opposition to the defendant will now not fail. The judgment of the plaintiff, however, is not rash. The position can be defined by means of the case of Jones v . Boyce . In that case, the plaintiff used to be a passenger in the defendant’s train and instruct