Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 18283 (3.61 seconds)
Documents citing B.S. Joshi & Ors vs State Of Haryana & Anr on 13 March, 2003

Amit Rod And Others .....Applicants vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 31 October, 2018

8. Apart from the said decision, reliance was also placed on another decision of this Court in the case of B.S. Joshi and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Anr (2003) 4 SCC 675 wherein while dealing with the proceedings under Sections 498A and 406 Indian Penal Code involving matrimonial disputes and offences, this Court held that even though the provisions of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure would not apply to such offences, which are not compoundable it did not limit or affect the powers under Section 482 and the powers conferred on the High Courts and the Supreme Court under Articles 226 and 136 of the Constitution of India.
Uttarakhand High Court Cites 61 - Cited by 3 - S K Sharma - Full Document

P. Laxmi Patra @ Palia Laxmi @ vs State Of Odisha And Others ....... Opp. ... on 4 March, 2025

(2013) 1 SCC (Civ) 298 : (2013) 1 SCC (Cri) 638] was again a case where the accused persons were charged of having committed the offences under Sections 120-B, 465, 467, 468 and 471IPC and the allegations were that the accused secured the credit facilities by submitting forged property documents as collaterals and utilised such facilities in a dishonest and fraudulent manner by opening letters of credit in respect of foreign supplies of goods, without actually bringing any goods but inducing the bank to negotiate the letters of credit in favour of foreign suppliers and also by misusing the cash-credit facility. The Court was alive to the reference made in one of the present matters and also the decisions in B.S. Joshi [B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675 : 2003 SCC (Cri) 848] , Nikhil Merchant [Nikhil Merchant v. CBI, (2008) 9 SCC 677 : (2008) 3 SCC (Cri) 858] and Manoj Sharma [Manoj Sharma v. State, (2008) 16 SCC 1 : (2010) 4 SCC (Cri) 145] and it was held that B.S. Joshi [B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675 :
Orissa High Court Cites 18 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Shakib vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 September, 2025

The Court was alive to the reference made in one of the present matters and also the decisions in B.S. Joshi [B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675 : 2003 SCC (Cri) 848] , Nikhil Merchant [Nikhil Merchant v. CBI, (2008) 9 SCC 677 : (2008) 3 SCC (Cri) 858] and Manoj Sharma [Manoj Sharma v. State, (2008) 16 SCC 1 : (2010) 4 SCC (Cri) 145] and it was held that B.S. Joshi [B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675 : 2003 SCC (Cri) 848] and Nikhil Merchant [Nikhil Merchant v. CBI, (2008) 9 SCC 677 : (2008) 3 SCC (Cri) 858] dealt with different factual situation as the dispute involved had overtures of a civil dispute but the case under consideration in Ashok Sadarangani [Ashok Sadarangani v. Union of India, (2012) 11 SCC 321 :
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 20 - Cited by 0 - A K Singh - Full Document

Alex vs State Of Kerala on 20 February, 2007

6. Not so in this case. The offence under Sec.3 of the Act reflects the anxiety of the legislature to ensure the interests of the socially weak. That cannot be the subject matter of compromise and I am of opinion that quashing of proceedings on the basis of such composition of the non-compoundable offence under Sec.3(1)(x) of the Act cannot be achieved by invocation of the powers under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C. The dictum in B.S. Joshy v. State of Haryana (AIR 2003 SC 1386) does not permit quashing of all prosecutions of non-compoundable offence merely because parties have settled their disputes.
Kerala High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - R Basant - Full Document

Sri Ashish Kanagali vs Central Bureau Of Investigation on 30 September, 2022

The Court was alive to the reference made in one of the present matters and also the decisions in B.S. Joshi [B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675: 2003 SCC (Cri) 848] , Nikhil Merchant [Nikhil Merchant v. CBI, (2008) 9 SCC 677: (2008) 3 SCC (Cri) 858] and Manoj Sharma [Manoj Sharma v. State, (2008) 16 SCC 1: (2010) 4 SCC (Cri) 145] and it was held that B.S. Joshi [B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675 : 2003 SCC (Cri) 848] and Nikhil Merchant [Nikhil Merchant v. CBI, (2008) 9 SCC 677: (2008) 3 SCC (Cri) 858] dealt with different factual situation as the dispute involved had overtures of a civil dispute but the case under consideration in Ashok Sadarangani [Ashok Sadarangani v. Union of India, (2012) 11 SCC 321: (2013) 1 SCC (Civ) 298: (2013) 1 SCC (Cri) 638] was more on the criminal intent than on a civil aspect.
Karnataka High Court Cites 50 - Cited by 0 - M Nagaprasanna - Full Document

Ashish Rana And Others ...Petitioners vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 18 September, 2018

8. Apart from the said decision, reliance was also placed on another decision of this Court in the case of B.S. Joshi and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Anr (2003) 4 SCC 675 wherein while dealing with the proceedings under Sections 498A and 406 Indian Penal Code involving matrimonial disputes and offences, this Court held that even though the provisions of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure would not apply to such offences, which are not compoundable it did not limit or affect the powers under Section 482 and the powers conferred on the High Courts and the Supreme Court under Articles 226 and 136 of the Constitution of India.
Uttarakhand High Court Cites 34 - Cited by 0 - S K Sharma - Full Document

Praveen Oberoi & Ors vs State & Anr on 30 August, 2011

No.8989/2010 wherein the Division Bench of the Supreme Court has referred three earlier decisions viz, B.S. Joshi V. State of Haryana (2003) 4 SCC 675, Nikhil Merchant v. Central Bureau of Inestigation and Anr. (2008) 9 SCC 677 and Manoj Sharma Vs, State & Ors. (2008) 16 SCC 1 to the larger Bench for re-consideration whether the abovesaid three decisions were decided correctly or not.
Delhi High Court Cites 30 - Cited by 0 - S K Kait - Full Document

Suresh C Singal vs The State Of Gujarat on 16 April, 2025

(2012) 4 SCC (Civ) 1188 : (2013) 1 SCC (Cri) 160 : (2012) 2 SCC (L&S) 988] , his Lordship considers the cases where the Court has refused to quash the proceedings irrespective of the settlement. The Court considers the different factual positions arising in B.S. Joshi [B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675 : 2003 SCC (Cri) 848] , Nikhil Merchant [Nikhil Merchant v. CBI, (2008) 9 SCC 677 : (2008) 3 SCC (Cri) 858], and Manoj Sharma [Manoj Sharma v. State, (2008) 16 SCC 1 : (2010) 4 SCC (Cri) 145] on one hand and the CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 3862 OF 2024 Page 15 of 20 other cases where the Court refused to quash the proceedings.
Supreme Court of India Cites 28 - Cited by 0 - A Oka - Full Document

Mr.Hansarajsaxena vs State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police on 27 July, 2011

31. On an overall view of the facts as indicated herein above and keeping in mind the decision of this Court in B.S. Joshi case reported in ((2003) 4 SCC (Cri) 848) and the compromise arrived at between the Company and the Bank as also Clause 11 of the consent terms filed in the suit filed by the Bank, we are satisfied that this is a fit case where technicality should not be allowed to stand in the way in the quashing of the criminal proceedings, since, in our view, the continuance of the same after the compromise arrived at between the parties would be a futile exercise."
Madras High Court Cites 26 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Applicants vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others on 4 October, 2018

8. Apart from the said decision, reliance was also placed on another decision of this Court in the case of B.S. Joshi and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Anr (2003) 4 SCC 675 wherein while dealing with the proceedings under Sections 498A and 406 Indian Penal Code involving matrimonial disputes and offences, this Court held that even though the provisions of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure would not apply to such offences, which are not compoundable it did not limit or affect the powers under Section 482 and the powers conferred on the High Courts and the Supreme Court under Articles 226 and 136 of the Constitution of India.
Uttarakhand High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - S K Sharma - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next