This prompted Kuzhalnadan to file the present revision petition arguing that had the vigilance court appreciated the complaint in its entirety, it would be clear that the offences alleged are attracted in the case.
The vigilance court’s rejection of the complaint violates the procedure laid out in the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which in turn renders the order illegal, Kuzhalnadan contended.
He argued that his complaint could not have been rejected at the threshold and at best could have been dismissed after examining the complaint and any witnesses.
Kuzhalnadan contended that the vigilance court’s choice to reject the complaint violates the procedure laid out under Section 200 of the CrPC and expounded upon by the Supreme Court in various precedents.
On these, among other grounds, Kuzhalnadan has requested the High Court to set aside the order of the vigilance court and remand the original complaint for fresh consideration.
Source: Barandbench
