Hearing on VS plea postponed

CityPioneer

Editor

posted on 12 years ago — updated on 1 second ago

37
views

Follow us:WhatsappFacebookTwitterTelegram.cls-1{fill:#4d4d4d;}.cls-2{fill:#fff;}Google NewsThe Judicial First Class Magistrate Court 1, here, on Saturday posted the hearing on the petition filed by Opposition Leader V S Achuthanandan, requesting to hear his version on the final report filed by the Special Investigation Team on the ice-cream parlour sex scandal sabotage case, to September 11.The hearing has been postponed owing to the leave of Magistrate P T Prakash. Earlier in July, the court had postponed the hearing to September 1 on the basis of a request made by counsel for Achuthanandan, P Rajeev, to allot more time as the petitioner had not obtained all documents submitted by the investigation team in the court.The investigation team had given a report in June, stating that no sufficient evidence had been found to charge any person on the allegations that the accused had entered into a conspiracy, influenced the victims by offering money, forged documents, destroyed evidence and fabricated evidence to win the case in 2006.first published:September 02, 2012, 12:03 ISTlast updated:September 02, 2012, 12:03 IST
window._taboola = window._taboola || [];_taboola.push({mode: 'thumbnails-a', container: 'taboola-below-article-thumbnails', placement: 'Below Article Thumbnails', target_type: 'mix' });Latest News

The Judicial First Class Magistrate Court 1, here, on Saturday posted the hearing on the petition filed by Opposition Leader V S Achuthanandan, requesting to hear his version on the final report filed by the Special Investigation Team on the ice-cream parlour sex scandal sabotage case, to September 11.

The hearing has been postponed owing to the leave of Magistrate P T Prakash. Earlier in July, the court had postponed the hearing to September 1 on the basis of a request made by counsel for Achuthanandan, P Rajeev, to allot more time as the petitioner had not obtained all documents submitted by the investigation team in the court.

The investigation team had given a report in June, stating that no sufficient evidence had been found to charge any person on the allegations that the accused had entered into a conspiracy, influenced the victims by offering money, forged documents, destroyed evidence and fabricated evidence to win the case in 2006.