Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 57 (0.48 seconds)Section 482 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 132 in Bombay Police Act, 1951 [Entire Act]
Section 132 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 132 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 170 in The Karnataka Police Act, 1963. [Entire Act]
Sankaran Moitra vs Smt. Sadhna Das & Anr on 24 March, 2006
6.3. Learned PP would further submit that the order of this Court in
Special Criminal Application No.970 of 2007 and allied matters, not
laying down a ratio decidendi and furthermore, the conclusion which
has been arrived at by the learned Coordinate Bench about non-
availability of sanction automatically resulting in quashing of
proceedings may not be the correct position of law, as has been
explained by the Hon'ble Apex Court in number of decisions,
including the decision of Sankaran Moitra Vs. Sadhna Das and
Anr. (supra), which has been relied upon by the learned Court in the
decision itself. Learned PP would, therefore, submit that the said
decision may not be treated as a binding precedent by this Court.
6.4. Learned PP would also draw the attention of this Court to a very
specific observation by the learned Coordinate Bench in the said
order that the order of learned JMFC takes note of the fact that the
complainant therein himself is an accused and was arrested while he
was part of the unlawful assembly. Learned PP would submit that
while in the instant case the fact of the complainant being arrested is
mentioned, there is no reference found in the order passed by the
Page 17 of 57
Downloaded on : Thu May 05 21:11:03 IST 2022
R/CR.MA/1799/1996 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/05/2022
learned Magistrate that he was part of the unlawful assembly.
Learned PP would submit that since the fact of the complainant in
the case before this Court in Special Criminal Application No.970 of
2007 and allied matters is different from the case of the complainant
in the instant case, more particularly in view of the fact that in the
instant case, the learned Magistrate while issuing process had not
noticed as in the case before this Court in Special Criminal
Application No.970 of 2007 that the complainant was a part of the
unlawful assembly, according to learned PP, the consideration in the
present case would be totally different. Learned PP would submit
that the said decision under such circumstances may not be treated as
binding to this Court, more particularly since there is no proposition
of law laid down by this Court in the said case.