SC dismisses Adoor Prakash’s challenge to Kerala HC order in corruption case
The court stated that it found no reason to exercise its jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution.
The court stated that it found no reason to exercise its jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution.
The court stated that it found no reason to exercise its jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday rejected Lok Sabha MP Adoor Prakash’s plea against a Kerala High Court order that allowed the state to file a delayed appeal in a corruption case against him. The High Court had earlier permitted the government to challenge the order clearing the Congress leader of corruption charges, even though the appeal was filed 225 days late.
After hearing Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi passed the order. The bench made no comments on the merits. However, the bench stated that it found no reason to exercise its jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution, according to which the Supreme Court may grant special leave to appeal from any judgment or order in any cause or matter passed or made by any court or tribunal in the country.
Adoor Prakash and his former Private Secretary filed the plea asserting that the High Court condoned the lengthy delay in the filing of the appeal by the state without assigning any reasons. The petitioner contended that the High Court should not have condoned the "inordinate delay" since the state did not adequately explain it.
The state had moved to the High Court seeking condonation of the delay in filing the criminal revision petition against a 2021 order of the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Kozhikode. This would discharge the petitioners registered under Sections 7/12/15 read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 120B of IPC, citing that there were no grounds to proceed.
The High Court condoned the delay, noting that Section 5 of the Limitation Act has to be construed liberally to do substantive justice. The court also had to determine whether there was sufficient cause for the delay. It also said that the related criminal revisions were already before the court.
Aggrieved by the High Court's order, the petitioners filed the present petition, claiming a violation of their rights under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. They referred to the criminal revision petition as a politically motivated "abuse of process" targeted to "wreak vengeance".