Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 399 (0.83 seconds)
Documents citing Usha Chakraborty vs State Of West Bengal on 30 January, 2023

Sathuri Gopal Rao vs The State Of Jharkhand on 24 September, 2024

8. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 on the other hand opposes the prayer as made by the petitioners in the criminal miscellaneous petitions and submits that this is not a case of civil dispute rather the petitioners have committed extortion, caused hurt, criminally intimidated the complainant, intentionally insulted him, in criminal conspiracy with each other and besides that having committed offence of cheating; so the ratio of Usha Chakraborty & Anr. vs. State of West Bengal & Anr. (supra) is not applicable to the facts of the case, more so because unlike the case of Usha Chakraborty & Anr. vs. State of West Bengal & Anr. (supra) where only FIR was registered, but in this case the allegation against the petitioners was found to be true after investigation of the case by the police and charge sheet has been submitted, cognizance has been taken and even charge has been framed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jamshedpur upon considering the materials available in the record including the case diary by the police. So far as the non-compliance of Section 154 (3) Cr.P.C. is concerned, it is submitted that keeping in view the fact Cr.M.P. No.3906 of 2018 with Cr.M.P. No.2763 of 2018 6 of the case where the allegation made against the petitioners was considered to be true in the investigation by the police, at this belated stage the non-compliance of Section 154 (3) Cr.P.C. cannot be taken into consideration for quashing the entire criminal proceeding. Hence, it is submitted that these criminal miscellaneous petitions being without any merit be dismissed.
Jharkhand High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - A K Choudhary - Full Document

Sathuri Gopal Rao vs The State Of Jharkhand on 24 September, 2024

8. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 on the other hand opposes the prayer as made by the petitioners in the criminal miscellaneous petitions and submits that this is not a case of civil dispute rather the petitioners have committed extortion, caused hurt, criminally intimidated the complainant, intentionally insulted him, in criminal conspiracy with each other and besides that having committed offence of cheating; so the ratio of Usha Chakraborty & Anr. vs. State of West Bengal & Anr. (supra) is not applicable to the facts of the case, more so because unlike the case of Usha Chakraborty & Anr. vs. State of West Bengal & Anr. (supra) where only FIR was registered, but in this case the allegation against the petitioners was found to be true after investigation of the case by the police and charge sheet has been submitted, cognizance has been taken and even charge has been framed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jamshedpur upon considering the materials available in the record including the case diary by the police. So far as the non-compliance of Section 154 (3) Cr.P.C. is concerned, it is submitted that keeping in view the fact Cr.M.P. No.3906 of 2018 with Cr.M.P. No.2763 of 2018 6 of the case where the allegation made against the petitioners was considered to be true in the investigation by the police, at this belated stage the non-compliance of Section 154 (3) Cr.P.C. cannot be taken into consideration for quashing the entire criminal proceeding. Hence, it is submitted that these criminal miscellaneous petitions being without any merit be dismissed.
Jharkhand High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - A K Choudhary - Full Document

Aza Enterprises Private Ltd. And Others vs The Union Territory Of Andaman And ... on 22 December, 2025

In Usha Chakraborty v State of West Bengal, (2023) 15 SCC 135, while quashing the FIR therein and further proceedings based thereon, it was observed '...the factual position thus would reveal that the genesis as also the purpose of criminal proceedings are nothing but the aforesaid incident and further that the dispute involved is essentially of civil nature.'"
Calcutta High Court - Port Blair Cites 22 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Aza Enterprises Private Ltd. And Others vs The Union Territory Of Andaman And ... on 22 December, 2025

In Usha Chakraborty v State of West Bengal, (2023) 15 SCC 135, while quashing the FIR therein and further proceedings based thereon, it was observed '...the factual position thus would reveal that the genesis as also the purpose of criminal proceedings are nothing but the aforesaid incident and further that the dispute involved is essentially of civil nature.'"
Calcutta High Court - Port Blair Cites 22 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Indian Institute Of Planning And ... vs State (Nct Of Delhi) And Anr. on 31 July, 2024

In Usha Chakraborty and Another v. State of West Bengal and Another, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 90; and Alhaj Ebrahim Khan and Others v. Sopan Pandharinath Lohakare, 2015 SCC OnLine Bom 1668, it was held that the Magistrate must apply his mind to see whether essential ingredients of cognizable offences are disclosed and while the Magistrate is not required to embark on a roving inquiry on the reliability or genuineness of the allegations, he has to arrive at a conclusion that application discloses necessary ingredients of the offence. Perusal of the impugned order in the present case, does not reflect application of mind as to how the essential ingredients of the alleged offences are even prima facie made out and nothing is forthcoming for disregarding the two ATRs filed by EOW, bringing on record crucial facts emerging from a thorough investigation and stating that the disputes are purely civil arising out of commercial transactions and no cognizable offence is made out. It is settled that the Magistrate can disagree with the ATR and take a different view but the order must indicate some reasoning to differ and disregard the police reports. On these grounds itself, in my view, the impugned order become vulnerable and deserves to be set aside.
Delhi High Court Cites 61 - Cited by 0 - J Singh - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next