Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 63 (0.70 seconds)
Documents citing Kishore Kumar Gyanchandani vs G.D. Mehrotra And Anr. on 28 February, 2001

Goldy Rajiv Santhoji vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 6 May, 2021

24. In fact, the case itself was decided by a Bench of three learned Judges of this Court in view of the divergence of opinion in the Court. The Court held as follows: (Kishore Kumar Gyanchandani case [Kishore Kumar Gyanchandani v. G.D. Mehrotra, (2011) 15 SCC 513 : (2012) 4 SCC (Cri) 633] , SCC p. 514, para 6) "6. It is too well settled that when police after investigation files a final form under Section 173 of the Code, the Magistrate may disagree with the conclusion 20 arrived at by the police and take cognizance in exercise of power under Section 190 of the Code. The Magistrate may not take cognizance and direct further investigation in the matter under Section 156 of the Code. Where the Magistrate accepts the final form submitted by the police, the right of the complainant to file a regular complaint is not taken away and in fact on such a complaint being filed the Magistrate follows the procedure under Section 201 of the Code and takes cognizance if the materials produced by the complainant make out an offence.
Uttarakhand High Court Cites 56 - Cited by 1 - R Maithani - Full Document

George Mathew vs Poulose Varkey on 26 March, 2004

21. Coming to the contention that the learned Magistrate had no jurisdictional competence to take cognizance on a private complaint after accepting the negative final report in favour of the petitioner, after detailed discussions at the Bar, it is fairly conceded that the question has been answered by the Supreme Court against the petitioner in the decisions reported in Gopal Vijay Verma v. Bhuneshwar Prasad Sinha and Ors., (1982) 3 SCC 510, Kishore Kumar Gyanchandani v. G.D. Mehrotra and Anr., 2002 SCC (Cri) 1116, and in Kishore Kumar Gyanchandani v. G.D. Mehrotra and Anr., AIR 2002 SC 483.
Kerala High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 1 - R Basant - Full Document

Mookiah vs Vellaichamy on 3 October, 2019

6. With utmost respect, I must express my inability to follow the aforesaid order dated 03.01.2019 made in Crl.O.P.No.2830 of 2017(Thiyagarajan V. Karuppannan and one other).This is for the simple reason that the direct decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court made in Kishore Kumar Gyanchandani V. G.D.Mehrotra((2011) 15 SCC 513) was not brought to the notice of the learned Judge. The three-Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said decision held as follows:-
Madras High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - G R Swaminathan - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 Next