Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 34 (0.72 seconds)Article 21 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 200 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 5 in The Limitation Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
Section 190 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
India Carat Pvt. Ltd vs State Of Karnataka & Anr on 15 February, 1989
Ltd., (supra), leave no room for doubt that the Magistrate is
not bound with the conclusions arrived at by the
investigating agency and it is open for him to apply his mind
independently to the facts emerging from the investigation
and take cognizance of the case if he deems fit, in exercise
of his powers under Section 190(1)(b). The Magistrate in
such a situation is not bound to follow the procedure laid
down in Sections 200 and 202 of the Code for taking
cognizance under Section 190(1)(a), though alternatively it
is open to him to act under Section 200 or Section 202 also.
Article 14 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 203 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
The Guardians And Wards Act, 1890
State Of Punjab vs Sarwan Singh on 2 April, 1981
"It is true that the object of introducing Section 468 was to
put a bar of limitation on prosecutions and to prevent the
parties from filing cases after a long time, as it was thought
proper that after a long lapse of time, launching of
prosecution may be vexatious, because by that time even
the evidence may disappear. This aspect has been
mentioned in the statement and object, for introducing a
period of limitation, as well as by this Court in the case of
Sarwan Singh (supra). But, that consideration cannot be
extended to matrimonial offences, where the allegations are
of cruelty, torture and assault by the husband or other
members of the family to the complainant. It is a matter of
common experience that victim is subjected to such cruelty
repeatedly and it is more or less like a continuing offence.
It is only as a last resort that a wife openly comes before a
court to unfold and relate the day-to-day torture and cruelty
faced by her, inside the house, which many of such victims
do not like to be made public. As such, courts while
561-A no.41/2008 Page 31 of 37
considering the question of limitation for an offence under
Section 498-A i.e. subjecting a woman to cruelty by her
husband or the relative of her husband, should judge that
question, in the light of Section 473 of the Code, which
requires the Court, not only to examine as to whether the
delay has been properly explained, but as to whether it is
necessary to do so in the interests of justice."