Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 1369 (1.05 seconds)
Documents citing M/S. Skipper Beverages Pvt. Ltd. vs State on 24 April, 2001

Lt. Col. C.M. Upreti vs Sh. K.K. Bhargava on 10 February, 2016

Delhi in Skipper Beverages Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State (supra), wherein it was held, "10. Section 156(3) of the Code aims at curtailing and controlling the arbitrariness on the part of the police authorities in the matter of registration of FIRs and taking up investigations, even in those cases where the same are warranted. The Section empower the Magistrate to issue directions in this regard but this provision should not be permitted to be misused by the complainants to get police cases registered even in those cases which are not very serious in nature and the Magistrate himself can hold enquiry under Chapter XV and proceed against the accused if required. Therefore, a Magistrate, must apply his mind before passing an order under Section 156(3) of the Code and must not pass these orders mechanically on the mere asking by the complainant. These powers ought to be exercised primarily in those cases where the allegations are quite serious or evidence is beyond the reach of complainant or custodial interrogation appears to be necessary for some recovery of article or discovery of fact."
Delhi District Court Cites 25 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Lt. Col. C.M. Upreti vs Sh. K.K. Bhargava on 10 February, 2016

16. The law governing the choice to be exercised from amongst the two options has been settled by this Court in M/s. Skipper Beverages Pvt. Ltd. vs. State, 2001 IV AD (Delhi). In the said case it was held that a Magistrate must apply his mind before passing an order under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and must not pass these orders mechanically on the mere asking by the complainant. These powers ought to be exercised primarily in those cases where the allegations are quite serious or evidence is beyond the reach of the complainant or custodial interrogation appears to be necessary for some recovery of articles or discovery of facts.
Delhi District Court Cites 22 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Narender Sharma vs The State on 2 September, 2014

15. The question as to how a Magistrate is to deal with application u/s 156 (3) Cr.P.C. was dealt by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Skipper Beverages Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State, 92 (2001) DLT 217, wherein it was held, "10. Section 156(3) of the Code aims at curtailing and controlling the arbitrariness on the part of the police authorities in the matter of registration of FIRs and taking up investigations, even in those cases where the same are warranted. The Section empower the Magistrate to issue directions in this regard but this provision should not be permitted to be misused by the complainants to get police cases registered even in those cases which are not very serious in nature and the Magistrate himself can hold enquiry under Chapter XV and proceed against the accused if required. Therefore, a Magistrate, must apply his mind before passing an order under Section 156(3) of the Code and must not pass Crl. Rev. No. 04/14 02-09-2014 10 of 18 these orders mechanically on the mere asking by the complainant. These powers ought to be exercised primarily in those cases where the allegations are quite serious or evidence is beyond the reach of complainant or custodial interrogation appears to be necessary for some recovery of article or discovery of fact."
Delhi District Court Cites 22 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next