citedby: 94484060 doctypes: delhi

A Krishna Reddy vs Cbi Thr. Director on 23 February, 2017

5. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Maneesh Goomer's case (supra) has held that Section 195 Cr.P.C. has not been correspondingly amended so as to include section 174-A I.P.C., which was brought into the Penal Code with effect from 23rd June 2006 and there is no reason to deviate with the view of Hon'ble Delhi High Court."

Delhi High Court Cites 28 - Cited by 7 - S P Garg - Full Document

Purushottam Dev Arya vs Cbi on 23 February, 2017

5. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Maneesh Goomer's case (supra) has held that Section 195 Cr.P.C. has not been correspondingly amended so as to include section 174-A I.P.C., which was brought into the Penal Code with effect from 23rd June 2006 and there is no reason to deviate with the view of Hon'ble Delhi High Court."

Delhi High Court Cites 30 - Cited by 2 - S P Garg - Full Document

Sanjeev Srivastava And Another vs State Of Nct Of Delhi on 31 October, 2023

16. As far as the judgment in Maneesh Goomer (supra) relied upon by learned APP for the State is concerned, it is noted that the facts of the said case are distinct from the present one inasmuch as the offence under Section 138 of the NI Act had not been compounded therein and the trial was pending before the learned metropolitan Magistrate.

Delhi High Court Cites 20 - Cited by 0 - A Sharma - Full Document

Amandeep Gill & Anr vs The State Govt Of Nct Of Delhi on 19 September, 2024

28. The impugned order having solely relied on Maneesh Goomer (supra) for its conclusion, the said order cannot be sustained.

Delhi High Court Cites 32 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Ubabueze Chijioke Emmaunle @ Jojo vs State (Nct Of Delhi) on 26 November, 2024

26. Though, the coordinate Bench of this Court in Amandeep Gill (supra) has proceeded ahead to quash the complaint but this Court is of the opinion that in view of the cleavage between Maneesh Goomer (supra) & Amandeep Gill (supra) and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in C. Muniappan (supra), this question must be referred to a larger Bench to resolve the issue.

Delhi High Court Cites 53 - Cited by 0 - S Prasad - Full Document

Munnawar Hasan vs State Of Nct Of Delhi on 30 April, 2013

In support of above submission reliance was placed by petitioner's counsel upon decisions in Rohit Kumar alias Raju v. State of NCT Delhi & Anr. 2008 CRL.L.J. 3561; Maneesh Goomer v. State 2012 [1] JCC 465 & Sunil Kumar v. State and another 2002 CRL. L.J. 1284.

Delhi High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 2 - S Gaur - Full Document

Mustkeem @ Shanu vs The State (Nct Of Delhi) on 10 May, 2016

In 'Maneesh Goomer vs. State', 2012 SCC OnLine Del 66, this Court held that Section 174A IPC is an independent cause of action and Crl.R.P.331/2015 Page 3 of 4 merely because the complaint case under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act was settled, there was no reason that the FIR could also be quashed.

Delhi High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - S P Garg - Full Document

Search Results Page

Refine Search

Search Results