Vivek Batra vs The Union Of India on 29 October, 2013
7) State of Bihar v/s P.P.Sharma, reported in AIR 1991 SC
1260.
Search Results Page
Search Results
81 - 90 of 13385 (5.70 seconds)Documents citing
State Of Bihar Etc. Etc vs P.P. Sharma, Ias And Anr on 2 April, 1991
Sri Prabhu Shankar vs State Of Karnataka on 8 September, 2021
DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT reported in (2019) 9 SCC
24 and brought to the notice of this Court paragraph Nos.64 to
66 wherein the Apex Court relied upon the judgment of State of
Bihar v. P.P. Sharma in paragraph No.64 and in paragraph No.66
held that it is not the function of the Court to monitor the
investigation process so long as the investigation does not
violate any provision of law. It must be left to the discretion of
the investigating agency to decide the course of investigation. If
the Court is to interfere in each and every stage of the
investigation and the interrogation of the accused, it would affect
the normal course of investigation.
Harish Fabiani & Ors. vs Enforcement Directorate & Ors. on 26 September, 2022
viii) Reliance was also placed on State of Bihar & Anr. Vs. P.P
Sharma, IAS, & Anr., 1992 Supp (1) 222 at para 23 to contend that
even if, as per the petitioners, there were mala fides of the
informant/complainant which led to the registration of the said FIR it
should not impact investigation by the Investigating Officer.
Narendra Jain vs Lokayukta Police Establishment on 16 June, 2023
21. The said judgment in Madhavrao case was
reconsidered and explained by this Court in State of Bihar
v. P.P. Sharma which reads as under: (SCC p. 271, para
Sh. B.S. Thind And Etc. vs State Of H.P. And Anr. on 6 April, 1992
22. There is another aspect of the case on which the Chief Judicial Magistrate has opined that it will be only after evidence is adduced by both the parties whereby the complainant respondent proves his case and the petitioners establish their defence and also that they have acted in discharge of their official duty that question of sanction can be determined. For taking this view, he has referred to a Supreme Court judgment in State of Bihar v. Shri P.P. Sharma, (1991) 2 JT 147 : AIR 1991 SC 1260 : 1991 Cri LJ 1438. In para 68 of this judgment, K. Ramaswamy, J., has observed :--
Shiv Kumar & Anr. vs State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr. on 3 July, 2023
Appeal No.
330 of 2021 (supra) and State of Bihar and Anr. vs PP Sharma, IAS and
Anr. (supra) must be satisfied and the power of the quashing should be
exercised sparingly and with circumspection.
Kangana Ranaut vs The Municipal Corporation Of Greater ... on 27 November, 2020
(b) It is the attainment of ends beyond the sanctioned purposes of power
by simulation or pretention of gaining legitimate goal. When the
custodian of power is infuenced in its exercise by consideration
30 Rajneesh Khajuria (supra), paragraph 16 quoting from itate of Bihar vs. P.P. iharma
PA Nitin Jagtap - PA - Dhuri 102 / 166 WPL-3011-2020-Final.doc
outside those for the promotion of which the power is vested, the
Court calls it colourable exercise and is undeceived by illusion.31
Mohammad Shafi Shah And Ors. vs State Of J. And K. And Ors. on 15 July, 2000
34. Again to quote from P.P. Sharma's case (1991 Cri LJ 1438) (SC) (supra), it is observed :-
Ashok Kumar Aggarwal vs Central Bureau Of Investigation on 13 January, 2016
60. The Supreme Court in its decision in State of Bihar and Anr. vs.
P.P. Sharma, IAS and Anr., reported as 1992 Supp (1) SCC 222 has
99ummarized on the importance of the entire investigation record to be
made available to the sanctioning authority and in the sanction order the
relevant facts as to the constitution of the offence must be apparent on the
face of it, the court held as under:
C.Rajan vs Union Of India on 20 December, 2013
After referring to various decisions of the Supreme Court starting from R.P.Kapoor vs. State of Punjab {AIR 1960 SC 866}, State of Haryana vs. Bhajanlal {AIR 1992 SC 604}, P.S.Rajya vs. State of Bihar {1996 J.T. (6) SC 480}, Pepsi Foods Ltd vs. Special Judicial Magistrate {1998 (5) SCC 749}, State of Orissa vs. Debendra Nath Padhi {2005 (1) CTC 134}, Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd vs. Md. Sharaful Haque {AIR 2004 SCW 6185} and State of Bihar vs. P.P.Sharma {1992 SCC (Cri) 192}, I held that even a charge sheet can be quashed, if the time tested parameters laid down in Bhajanlal's case, are satisfied and that great care and caution is to be exercised while invoking the said power. One of the parameters laid down in Bhajanlal, is the question whether the criminal proceeding was manifestly attended with mala fide and/or whether the proceeding was maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.