LegalFirms.in
LegalFirms.in Judgments · legalfirms.in/judgments/state-represented-by-the-deputy-superintendent-of-police-vigilance-and-anti-corruption-tamil-nadu-vs-20190307/ · Printed 07 Nov 2026
Criminal · Reportable judgment

State Represented by the Deputy Superintendent of Police Vigilance and Anti Corruption, Tamil Nadu vs J. Doraiswamy etc.

Court
Supreme Court of India
Date
7 March 2019
Case No.
Criminal Appeal Nos. 445-446 of 2019
Bench
Abhay Manohar Sapre, Dinesh Maheshwari
Citation
[2019] 2 S.C.R. 921 : 2019 INSC 329
Supreme Court Reports [2019] 2 S.C.R. 921 : 2019 INSC 329
Headnote

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973:

s.227 – Respondents-Police officials prosecuted under Prevention of Corruption Act – Charge sheet filed by the State Prosecuting Agency against the respondents – Application under s.227 filed by respondents praying for their discharge from the case which was allowed by trial court – High Court dismissed the revision petitions filed by State challenging the order of trial court – Validity – Held: While considering the case of discharge, sought immediately after the charge-sheet is filed, the Court cannot become an Appellate Court and start appreciating the evidence by finding out inconsistency in the statements of the witnesses as was done by the High Court in the impugned order – There is no prima facie case made out for discharge of the respondents at this stage of the trial – CJM should have, therefore, allowed the State to adduce the evidence on merits in support of the charge-sheet to prove the charges – Matter remitted to CJM to proceed with the trial – Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

Allowing the appeals and remitting the matter to CJM Court, the Court.

HELD: The High Court acted like an Appellate Court than as a Revisionary Court as if it was hearing the appeal against the final verdict of the Special Court. There was no prima facie case made out for discharge of the respondents at this stage of the trial. They, therefore, have to stand for trial on merits in the light of the documents and contents of charge-sheet filed pursuant to the order of the Court. [Paras 12, 18][923-G; 925-D]

As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.

Full Judgment Text

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. These appeals are directed against the final judgment and order dated 14.07.2016 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Crl. R.C. Nos.825 and 826 of 2015 whereby the High Court dismissed the revisions filed by the appellant-State and affirmed the order of the D Special Judge/Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruvannamalai by which the respondents herein were discharged under Section 227 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “the Crl.P.C.”) from the Criminal Proceedings fi
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools. For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
Annual plans from ₹1,599 + GST.

This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.

All SC judgments →