Search Results Page

Search Results

91 - 100 of 14112 (1.92 seconds)

Rinku Choudhari vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 March, 2025

In R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab [AIR 1960 SC 866 : (1960) 3 SCR 388] this Court summarised some categories of cases where inherent power can and should be exercised to quash the proceedings: (i) where it manifestly appears that there is a legal bar against the institution or continuance e.g. want of sanction; (ii) where the allegations in the first information report or complaint taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not constitute the offence alleged; (iii) where the allegations constitute an offence, but there is no legal evidence adduced or the evidence adduced clearly or manifestly fails to prove the charge. (AIR p. 869) 10. In dealing with the last category, it is important to bear in mind the distinction between a case where there is no legal evidence or where there is evidence which is clearly inconsistent with the accusations made, and a case where there is legal evidence which, on appreciation, may or may not support the accusations. When exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC, the High Court would not ordinarily embark upon an enquiry whether the evidence in question is reliable or not or whether on a reasonable appreciation of it accusation would not be sustained. That is the function of the trial Judge. Judicial process should not be an instrument of oppression, or, needless harassment. The court should be circumspect and judicious in exercising discretion and should take all relevant facts and circumstances into consideration before issuing process, lest it would be an instrument in the hands of a private complainant to unleash vendetta to harass any person needlessly. At the same time the section is not an instrument handed over to an accused to short-circuit a prosecution and bring about its sudden death.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 22 - Cited by 0 - G S Ahluwalia - Full Document

A.Parthasarathy vs State Represented By on 5 March, 2015

19. The learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon the decision reported in 1960 M.W.N (Crl.) 177, R.P.Kapur v. The State of Punjab and submits that where the allegations in the first information report or the complaint even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in entirety do not constitute the offence alleged it would be legitimate for the High Court to hold that it would be manifestly unjust to allow the process of the criminal court to be issued against the accused person. It is appropriate to incorporate the relevant portion of the said decision:
Madras High Court Cites 18 - Cited by 0 - R Mala - Full Document

Ganesh Traders vs District Collector, Karimnagar And ... on 12 November, 2001

50. The Apex Court in STATE OF HARYANA v BHAJAN LAL, , after reviewing entire case law including R.P. KAPUR'S CASE (supra) on the subject of quashing of criminal complaint/investigation under Article 226 and/or Section 482 Cr.P.C. pointed out that the power under those provisions should be exercised either to prevent abuse of process of any Court or otherwise to secure ends of justice. The Supreme Court pointed out the following categories of quashable cases by way of illustration.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 128 - Cited by 25 - S B Sinha - Full Document

Khalil Sarvar vs State Of Nct Of Delhi on 22 September, 2025

19. Before delving into the merits of the present case, this Court also considers it apposite to address the issue raised by the prosecutrix in relation to feasibility of quashing the FIR in the present proceedings as well. It is argued that the proceedings should not be quashed at this stage before charges have been framed against the accused. Reliance has been placed on the judgment in the case of R.P. Kapur v. The State of Punjab (supra) where the Hon'ble Apex Court opined that the Court should be reluctant in interfering with criminal proceedings at the interlocutory stage.
Delhi High Court Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
Previous   6 7 8 9 10   11 12 13 14 15 Next