Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.92 seconds)
Documents citing Abdul Nabi vs Gulam Murthuza Khan And Anr. on 13 April, 1966

Sunil Mehta & Anr vs State Of Gujarat & Anr on 20 February, 2013

“44. In Section 246 Cr.P.C. also, the phraseology is "if, when such evidence has been taken", meaning thereby, a clear reference is made to Section 244 Cr.P.C. The Bombay High Court came to the conclusion that the phraseology would, at the most, mean that the Magistrate may prefer to frame a charge, even before all the evidence is completed. The Bombay High Court, after considering the phraseology, came to the conclusion that the typical clause did not permit the Magistrate to frame a charge, unless there was some evidence on record. For this, the Learned Single Judge in that matter relied on the ruling in Abdul Nabi v. Gulam Murthuza Khan 1968 Cri LJ 303 (AP).”
Supreme Court of India Cites 27 - Cited by 49 - T S Thakur - Full Document

Mohit Kumar Kankar And Anr. vs State Of U.P. And Another on 19 December, 2014

44. In Section 246 Code of Criminal Procedure also, the phraseology is "if, when such evidence has been taken", meaning thereby, a clear reference is made to Section 244 Code of Criminal Procedure. The Bombay High Court came to the conclusion that the phraseology would, at the most, mean that the Magistrate may prefer to frame a charge, even before all the evidence is completed. The Bombay High Court, after considering the phraseology, came to the conclusion that the typical clause did not permit the Magistrate to frame a charge, unless there was some evidence on record. For this, the Learned Single Judge in that matter relied on the ruling in Abdul Nabi v. Gulam Murthuza Khan MANU/AP/0074/1968: 1968 Cri LJ 303 (AP)."
Allahabad High Court Cites 21 - Cited by 10 - S S Chauhan - Full Document

Nitin Jaiswal vs State Of U.P. And Another on 10 September, 2020

"44. In Section 246 Cr.P.C. also, the phraseology is "if, when such evidence has been taken", meaning thereby, a clear reference is made to Section 244 Cr.P.C. The Bombay High Court came to the conclusion that the phraseology would, at the most, mean that the Magistrate may prefer to frame a charge, even before all the evidence is completed. The Bombay High Court, after considering the phraseology, came to the conclusion that the typical clause did not permit the Magistrate to frame a charge, unless there was some evidence on record. For this, the Learned Single Judge in that matter relied on the ruling in Abdul Nabi v. Gulam Murthuza Khan 1968 Cri LJ 303 (AP)."
Allahabad High Court Cites 102 - Cited by 0 - R Misra - Full Document
1   2 Next