BALARAMAN Vs. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application is filed to call for the records of the respondent in his proceedings No. Nil dated 18.3.201 1 and quash the same.

(2.) Though the petitioner filed this petition to quash the summon issued by the respondent dated 18.3.2011, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been permitted to have the assistance of the lawyer during the examination by the respondent. In support of his contention, he relied upon the judgment in Smt. Nandini Satpathy v. P.L. Dani and Another, 1978 AIR(SC) 1025.

(3.) The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submitted that a case has been registered against the petitioner under Sections 7, 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and for the purpose of enquiry, notice was issued under Section 160 Cr.P.C. to the petitioner, who is accused of the case and the petitioner has to appear in obedience to the notice and he cannot have the assistance of lawyer and that will prevent the respondent from getting necessary information from the petitioner.