HC adjourned NICE petitions

Senior Counsel C V Nagesh, representing former Director NICE Shivkumar Kheny, making his submission before Justice H Billappa, sought to question the authority of the respondent (Abraham) to seek attachment of properties of some of the accused in the case.

He sought to know whether the respondent had been authorised by the State or the Central government to seek such attachment.

Citing the Supreme Court judgement, Nagesh submitted that without such authorisation either by the State or the Central government to make such a prayer, he could not have done so.

Nagesh further sought to question the jurisdiction of the Special Judge to order attachment of properties of some accused and the toll collected in the last two years.

Nagesh contended that even if the respondent had to move such an application, "he has to move it before a District Judge and not a Special Judge".

The Special Court is constituted by the State government or the Central government to try offences under the Prevention of Corruption (PC) Act.

"The Special Judge has no jurisdiction to try other offences unless and until it is tagged on to the PC Act".

Quoting an apex court judgement, Nagesh submitted that the "Special Judge becomes a District Judge only when trying an offence not when it is under investigation stage".

He submitted that in page 5 to 107 of the nearly 500 page order, the Special Judge, "mechanically produced the Kerala High Court judgement... In utter disregard to the rule of law, without judicial application of mind" and the impugned order "would have disastrous consequences." (MORE)