Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 172 (3.34 seconds)
Documents citing Rajib Ranjan & Ors vs R.Vijaykumar on 14 October, 2014

Mrs. Pradnya W/O Pradeep Patil @ ... vs Sri. Prashant S/O Subhash Kamat on 15 December, 2018

In the case of Rajib Ranjan and Others v. R. Vijaykumar reported in (2015)1 SCC 513, it was held that such sanction is necessary if the offence alleged against the public servant is committed while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duties. It was held therein 24 that even while discharging his official duties if a public servant enters into a criminal conspiracy or indulges in criminal misconduct, such misdemeanour on his part is not to be treated as an act in discharge of his official duties and, therefore, provisions of Section 197 of Cr.P.C. will not be attracted. Para 16 of the aforesaid judgment reads as under:
Karnataka High Court Cites 36 - Cited by 0 - M Nawaz - Full Document

Mukul Roy vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 20 July, 2018

Mr. Dutta further argued that in the present case, no sanction under Section 197 Cr.P.C. was required as the offences committed by the Petitioner cannot be said to have been committed in discharge of his official duties. Relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajib Ranjan Vs. Vijaykumar (2015) 1 SCC 513, he has argued that even while discharge of official duties, if a public servant enters into a criminal conspiracy or indulges in criminal misconduct, such misdemeanour on his part is not to be treated as an act in discharge of official duty and hence Section 197 Cr.P.C. is not attracted in view of the observations made in the following paras of the cited judgment:
Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side) Cites 53 - Cited by 21 - S Prasad - Full Document

Ramgopal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 16 August, 2019

In a recent decision in Rajib Ranjan and others v. R. Vijaykumar (2015) 1 SCC 513, at para 18, this Court has taken the view that "18........even while discharging his official duties, if a public servant enters into a criminal conspiracy or indulges in criminal misconduct, such misdemeanour on his part is not to be treated as an act in discharge of his official duties and, therefore, provisions of Section 197 of the Code will not be attracted".
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 35 - Cited by 0 - R K Srivastava - Full Document

Vishandas Kanwarmal Lakhwani 8 Others vs The State Of Telangana 3 Others on 26 September, 2018

Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Rajib Ranjan and others v. R. Vijaykumar (referred supra). In the facts of the above judgment, tender of respondent/complainant was rejected due to non- furnishing of necessary documents despite repeated request and also because earlier works carried out by respondent were not found satisfactory. The respondent at first made complaints, alleging irregularities to various persons, including State Government. No such irregularities were, however, found after enquiry and the respondent then filed civil suit challenging rejection of his tender but he sought to withdraw the same and suit was ultimately dismissed for non-prosecution. Then, he filed writ petition before High Court which was dismissed with costs with observation that it was abuse of process of Court. Thereafter, SLP was also dismissed by the Supreme Court and after exhaustion of these remedies, respondent filed complaint before police authorities who refused to register same on the ground that it was a civil dispute. The respondent then filed present criminal MSM,J CrlP.No.16104 of 2014 27 complaint under Sections 120-B, 468, 420 and 500 IPC with allegation that appellants (public servants) along with A-1 and A-2 conspired to create false certificate which was used against respondent in rejecting his tender and the Court concluded that the allegations of fabricating records were mischievously made as afterthought, just to give colour of criminality to a civil case. Further, same were made after losing long battle in civil proceedings. hence, filing of complaint was not bonafide and amounted to misuse and abuse of process of law and quashed the proceedings.
Telangana High Court Cites 30 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Cbi vs . M/S. Castron Technologies Ltd. & Ors. on 6 October, 2020

In the case Rajib Ranjan & Ors vs R. Vijay Kumar, (2015) 1 SCC 513 and Inspector of Police & Anr. Vs Battenapatla Venkata Ratnam &Anr., C.A. No. 129 of 2013 (SC), it has been categorically held by CBI Vs. M/s. Castron Technologies Ltd. & Ors. (Judgement dated 06.10.2020) Page No. 371 of 389 Hon'ble Supreme Court that when a public servant enters into a criminal conspiracy or indulges in criminal misconduct, such misdemeanour on his part is not to be treated as an act in discharge of his official duties and therefore, provisions of Section 197 Cr. PC will not be attracted.
Delhi District Court Cites 194 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Avadh Naresh vs State Of U.P. Thru. Secretary Home & 2 ... on 14 January, 2020

9. The decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court relied by the Revsionist in the cases of Rajasthan Vs. M/s. Binani Cements Ltd. reported in AIR 2014 SC (SUPP) 1926, T Barai vs. Henry Ah Hoe reported in the year 1982 LawSuit (SC) 211, Rajib Ranjan and Others vs. R. Vijaykumar reported in the year 2015 1 SCC 513, Jairam vs. State of Maharastra and Another reported in the year 2017 2 SCC 371, Vinay Tyagi vs. Irshad Ali @ Deepak and Ors. reported in the year 2013 CRL.
Allahabad High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - R Singh - Full Document

Shiv Kumar Singh Bhadouria vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 12 March, 2026

31. The Apex Court in Rajib Ranjan v. R. Vijaykumar (supra) has categorically observed that courts must guard against the growing tendency of converting purely civil disputes into criminal cases in order to exert pressure for settlement. It was emphasized that criminal proceedings are not a short cut to enforce civil claims and that inherent powers must be exercised to prevent abuse of process where a matter essentially civil in nature is given NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:7696 15 MCRC-21767-2021 a cloak of criminality.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - M R Phadke - Full Document

Maulana Imtiyaz Kadri vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 21 August, 2018

The fact of the cases Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat, Rajib Ranjan v. R. Vijaykumar and Binod Kumar v. State of Bihar (supra) relied by the learned counsel of the applicant do not match with the present case. In the first case applicant filed the petition for quashing of criminal proceedings on the basis of compromise. In the second case complainant filed complaint after dismissal of his civil suit and writ petition by the high 5 M.Cr.C.No.11751 of 2013 court with cost. In third case apex court rejected the complaint on the basis that no case of criminal breach of trust or dishonest intention of inducement was made out from the complaint. While in this case as discussed above offence is prima facie made against applicant.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 20 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Smt. K.Ratna Prabha vs State Of Telangana Rep. By Its Special ... on 20 June, 2017

In Rajib Ranjan (supra) at paras 14 to 18, it is observed that sanction is necessary if the offence alleged against the public servant is committed by him while acting or purporting to act in discharge of his official duties as held in Buddi Kota Subba Rao Vs. K.Prakasham at para-6 of the act or omission on facts found a reasonable connection to the discharge of his duty by the accused, sanction is required.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 156 - Cited by 1 - B S Rao - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next