Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 396 (1.15 seconds)
Documents citing Dineshbhai Chandubhai Patel vs The State Of Gujarat on 5 January, 2018

Reserved On: 24.03.2025 vs State Of H.P. And Others on 10 April, 2025

33. The inherent powers of the High Court, which are obviously not defined as being inherent in its very nature, cannot be stretched to any extent and nor can such powers be equated with the appellate powers of the High Court defined in the Code. The parameters laid down by this Court while exercising inherent powers must always be kept in mind else it would lead to committing a jurisdictional error in deciding the case. Such is the case here.
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 40 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Smt Revamma vs State Of Karnataka on 15 April, 2021

9. Having heard the petitioners' Counsel and also respondents' Counsel, this Court has to analyze the material available on record. It is settled principle that when the FIR is sought for quashing, the Apex Court also in the case of DINESHBHAI CHANDUBHAI PATEL v. THE STATE OF GUJARAT reported in 2018 [3] SCC 104 held that Court has to look into the contents of the complaint, where the complaint discloses prima facie committing of cognizable offence and then High Court should not venture to collect material as Appellate Court or interfere with the investigation to be done by the Investigating Officer and the same is the domain of the Investigating Officer.
Karnataka High Court Cites 18 - Cited by 0 - H P Sandesh - Full Document

Idel Sk @ Gaba Sk And Another vs State Of West Bengal & Anr on 6 April, 2026

37. Crucially, as held in Dineshbhai Chandubhai Patel v. State of Gujarat (supra), this Court cannot act as an investigating agency or a trial court, while exercising its inherent powers under Section 482. We cannot weigh the "truth" of the petitioners' defence of being bona fide purchasers against the complainant's allegations of forceful dispossession. Such a determination requires a "full-dress trial" where the "civil transaction" can be scrutinized to see if it was a genuine 19 CRR 2301 OF 2022 purchase or a coordinated effort to dispossess a member of a Scheduled Tribe of her property.
Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side) Cites 29 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

S. Babu Kumar vs State Rep. By on 18 May, 2018

In Dineshbhai Chandubhai Patel Vs. State of Gujarat and Others (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that in order to examine as to whether the factual contents of the FIR disclose any prima facie cognizable offence or not, the High Court cannot act like the investigating agency and nor can exercise the powers like an appellate Court. It was also held that at the stage of dealing with the application u/s. 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court could not appreciate the evidence nor could draw its own inferences from the contents of the FIR and the material relied on. It was also held that once the court finds that the FIR does disclose prima facie commission of any cognizable offence, it should stay its hand and allow the investigating machinery to step in to initiate the probe to unearth the crime in accordance with the procedure prescribed in the code.
Madras High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - P Rajamanickam - Full Document

Mr Anjan Roy vs The State Of Karnataka on 16 September, 2022

9. Per-contra, the learned senior counsel Sri C.V.Nagesh while taking this court through the documents appended to the petition and the contents of the application seeking vacation of the interim order would seek to demonstrate that the Complainant/Company has lost more than 100 crores for the acts of the petitioners. The covenants in the agreement that is entered into between the parties clearly indicate that for a period of 60 months there could be no competition with the Complainant/ Company. It is not after the period of 60 months the petitioners have indulged in such competition. It is in the year 2018 when the bar under the agreement was still operating there is competition from the petitioners and this fact is not in dispute. Therefore, he would contend that it is a matter of investigation as the investigation is yet to conclude and the petitioners would have all the opportunity later in law, in the event the final report is filed, at the hands of the Investigating Officer. He would place reliance upon the judgments 15 in the caseS of DINESHBHAI CHANDUBHAI PATEL v. STATE OF GUJARAT - (2018) 3 SCC 104; SKODA AUTO VOLKSWAGEN (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS - (2021) 5 SCC 795 and B.V.S.N.SASTRY v. STATE OF KARNATAKA - Criminal Petition No.6567 of 2020 decided on 25th February, 2021.
Karnataka High Court Cites 33 - Cited by 0 - M Nagaprasanna - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next