Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY in Prof. S. K. Bhalla vs State Of J&K And Others on 9 October, 2020Matching Fragments
48. Mr. S. S. Ahmed submits that the respondents had no jurisdiction in law to close the cases which were required to be referred to DoPT. Mr. S. S. Ahmed on earlier occasion had submitted that this was done in violation of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the judgment reported at (2012) 3 SCC 64, Subramanian Swamy v. Manmohan Singh and Station House Officer CBI/ACB/Banglore vs. B. A. Srinivasan and another, Criminal Appeal No.1837 of 2019 @ SLP (crl.) No.6106 of 2019, decided on 5th December 2019.
IA No. 48/2014 & CM Nos. 4036, 4065 of 2020 in
49. Mr. S. S. Ahmed submits that the respondents had no jurisdiction in law to close the cases which were required to be referred to DoPT. Mr. S. S. Ahmed on earlier occasion had submitted that this was done in violation of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the judgment reported at (2012) 3 SCC 64, Subramanian Swamy v. Manmohan Singh and Station House Officer CBI/ACB/Banglore vs. B. A. Srinivasan and another, Criminal Appeal No.1837 of 2019 @ SLP (crl.) No.6106 of 2019, decided on 5th December 2019.