Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 38 (0.81 seconds)The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988
Section 397 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 401 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 19 in The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Section 239 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 173 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 17 in The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
State By Police Inspector vs Sri. T. Venkatesh Murthy on 10 September, 2004
11. Coming to the appeal filed by the accused one of the
questions is whether the investigating officer was authorised to
conduct the investigation. The investigation was carried on by the
duly authorised officer, namely, the Deputy Superintendent of
Police under Section 17(c) of the Act. The broader issues raised
need not be looked into. The function of investigation was merely
to collect evidence and any irregularity and illegality in the course
of collection of evidence can hardly be considered by itself to affect
the legality of trial by a competent court of the offence so
investigated.”
22 The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the decision reported in (2004) 7
SCC 763 in the case of State by Police Inspector vs. T.Venkatesh Murthy,
further held as follows: