MURUGAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (Judgment of the Court was delivered by S. R. SINGHARAVELU. ,j.)There was an order dated 18.04.2002 in this Criminal Appeal No.696 of 1997 by the Division Bench of this Court while dismissing the above Criminal Appeal preferred by the appellant accused by name one Nallakannu @ Muthu, and a part thereof is as follows: "35. We are of the view that this is a fit case where we have to direct the prosecution of Murugan as well as Popular Muthiah; and the learned State Public prosecutor shall advise the State as to under what section they have to be charged and tried. We direct the C. B. C. I. D. , to take over the matter and re-investigate and prosecute the said Murugan and Popular Muthiah. "

(2.) It is against the said order the affected parties Popular Muthiah and murugan preferred the appeals in Crl. A. Nos.107 and 108 of 2003 before the Apex court. In the said appeals, a common order was passed on 04.07.2006 whereby the impugned judgment of this Division Bench of this Court was set aside and the matter was remitted back to this Court for consideration afresh.

(3.) Before going to the proposition of law by which the above order of remand was made by the Hon ble Supreme Court, it is worth mentioning the reasons given by this Court for making an order of reinvestigation in order to reinvestigate and prosecute the said Murugan and Popular Muthiah that reason is found in Paragraph 33 of the judgment of this Court in the following lines: