Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 29 (0.21 seconds)Section 415 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 468 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 200 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Birla Corporation Ltd. vs Adventz Investments And Holdings Ltd. on 9 May, 2019
34. We must also observe that the High Court, while dismissing the petition filed under Section 482 of the Code, failed to take due notice that criminal proceedings should not be allowed to be initiated when it is manifest that these proceedings have been initiated with ulterior motive of wreaking vengeance and with a view to spite the opposite side due to private or personal grudge. [Birla Corpn. Ltd. [Birla Corpn. Ltd. v. Adventz Investments & Holdings Ltd., (2019) 16 SCC 610 : (2020) 2 SCC (Cri) 828 : (2020) 2 SCC (Civ) 713]; Mehmood Ul Rehman [Mehmood Ul Rehman v. Khazir Mohammad Tunda, (2015) 12 SCC 420 : (2016) 1 SCC (Cri) 124]; R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866; and State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 : 1992 SCC (Cri) 426.] Allegations in the complaint and the pre-summoning evidence on record, when taken on the face value and accepted in entirety, do not constitute the offence alleged. The inherent powers of the court can and should be exercised in such circumstances. When the allegations in the complaint are so absurd or inherently improbable, on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient wrong for proceeding against the accused, summons should not be issued."
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Section 120B in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 202 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Smt. Kanchan Singh vs State Of Chhattisgarh 24 Wpc/2851/2018 ... on 10 October, 2018
7. Before filing of second final report, the complainant has also filed an original Suit No.451 of 2015 (Smt. Jalebshree Vs. Sri Parag Agarwal and others) for permanent injunction, wherein a written statement on behalf of applicants were also filed. The said suit was dismissed by an order dated 08.07.2016 since none appears on behalf of either parties in terms of Order IX Rule 3 C.P.C. No attempt has been made by complainant to restore the suit.
Deepak Gaba vs State Of Uttar Pradesh on 2 January, 2023
In the aforesaid circumstances, the Court takes note of above referred judgment Deepak Gaba and others (supra) and A.M. Mohan Vs. State Represented by SHO and another, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 339 that on basis of material available, dispute if any case was of civil nature and attempt of complainant remained unfutile since civil suit filed by complainant was dismissed for want of prosecution and for that it has made attempt to colour it as a criminal case.