Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 2326 (4.02 seconds)
Documents citing R. P. Kapur vs The State Of Punjab on 25 March, 1960

Zaki Ur Rahman Siddiqui vs State Of U.P. And Another on 30 September, 2022

18. It has been held by the Apex Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab : AIR 1960 SC 866; State of Haryana and Ors. Vs. Bhajan Lal and Others : 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335; State of Bihar Vs. P. P. Sharma : 1992 Supp (1) SCC 222; Trisuns Chemical Industry Vs. Rajesh Agarwal and Ors. : (1999) 8 SCC 686; M. Krishnan Vs. Vijay Singh & Anr. : (2001) 8 SCC 645; Zandu Pharmaceuticals Works Ltd. Vs. Mohammd Shariful Haque : (2005) 1 SCC 122; M. N. Ojha Vs. Alok Kumar Srivastava : (2009) 9 SCC 682; Joseph Salvaraj A. Vs. State of Gujarat and Ors. : (2011) 7 SCC 59; Arun Bhandari Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. : (2013) 2 SCC 801; Md. Allauddin Khan Vs. State of Bihar : (2019) 6 SCC 107; Anand Kumar Mohatta and Anr. Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), Department of Home and Anr. : (2019) 11 SCC 706; Rajeev Kourav Vs. Balasaheb & others : (2020) 3 SCC 317; Nallapareddy Sridhar Reddy Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh : (2020) 12 SCC 467, that exercise of inherent power of the High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is an exceptional one. Great care should be taken by the High Court before embarking to scrutinize the complaint/FIR/charge-sheet in deciding whether the rarest of the rare case is made out to scuttle the prosecution in its inception.
Allahabad High Court Cites 79 - Cited by 0 - S Gopal - Full Document

Ramnikbhai Vallabhbhai Sojitra vs State Of Gujarat on 9 November, 2022

The Supreme Court in the case of R.P. KAPUR VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [AIR 1960 SC Page 866] has laid down certain categories of cases wherein inherent jurisdiction to quash proceedings can and should be exercised. One of the said categories is where it manifestly appears that there is a legal bar against the institution or continuance of the criminal proceeding in respect of the offence alleged. Absence of the requisite sanction may, for instance, furnish cases under this category.
Gujarat High Court Cites 20 - Cited by 0 - V Nanavati - Full Document

Smt. Kiran Kunwar And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 3 August, 2022

9. I have given thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions raised by learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record. From perusal of the first information report, injury report and the statement of the informant and witnesses, prima-facie case punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act is made out against the applicants. The genuineness of the prosecution case cannot be determined in the proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and to determine the genuineness of the prosecution case can be only seen by trial court after recording the evidence. This Court cannot adjudicate upon in the proceeding under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in "R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.L.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426" where the first information report and the material available on CD and the charge-sheet discloses the commission of non-cognizable offence. From perusal of the first information report and the material available on record and the charge-sheet, prima-facie case punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act is made out against the applicants and it requires no interference in the impugned order of learned court below.
Allahabad High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 1 - M Aslam - Full Document

Mahesh vs State Of Haryana on 30 November, 2022

15 of 22 ::: Downloaded on - 07-12-2022 21:28:57 ::: CRA-S-1896-SB-2007 and other connected cases - 16- of the Investigating Officer to conduct the investigation avoiding any kind of mischief and harassment to any of the accused. The Investigating Officer should be fair and conscious so as to rule out any possibility of fabrication of evidence and his impartial conduct must dispel any suspicion as to its genuineness. The Investigating Officer "is not to bolster up a prosecution case with such evidence as may enable the court to record conviction but to bring out the real unvarnished truth". (Vide R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab AIR 1960 Supreme R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab AIR 1960 Supreme Court 866; Court 866; Jamuna Chaudhary & Ors. v. State of Bihar AIR Jamuna Chaudhary & Ors. v. State of Bihar AIR 1974 Supreme Court 1822; 1974 Supreme Court 1822; and Mahmood v. State of U.P. AIR Mahmood v. State of U.P. AIR 1976 Supreme Court 69). 1976 Supreme Court 69).
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 27 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Mita Maganbhai Panchal vs State Of Gujarat on 5 August, 2022

9. The Supreme Court in the case of R.P. KAPUR VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [AIR 1960 SC Page 866] has laid down certain categories of cases wherein inherent jurisdiction to quash proceedings can and should be exercised. One of the said categories is where it manifestly appears that there is a legal bar against the institution or continuance of the criminal proceeding in respect of the offence alleged. Absence of the requisite sanction may, for instance, furnish cases under this category.
Gujarat High Court Cites 25 - Cited by 1 - N S Desai - Full Document

Anil Kumar Rathore vs State Of U P And 3 Others on 17 January, 2022

27. The only exceptions are where no cognizable offence or offence of any kind is disclosed in the first information report the Court will not permit an investigation to go 'on', or where non-interference would result in miscarriage of justice the Court may interfere at the stage of investigation of offence. Regard being had to the parameters of quashing the first information report laid down by the Apex Court in M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.10, noticing its previous judgments in R.P. Kapur vs. State of Punjab11 and State of Haryana vs. Bhajanlal12, we find that no case is made out for quashing of the present FIR as it cannot be said that the FIR does not disclose commission of any cognizable offence or offence of any kind.
Allahabad High Court Cites 56 - Cited by 0 - S Agarwal - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next