Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.36 seconds)
Arumugam vs The State Represented By on 28 June, 2022 cites

Sabari @ Sabarinathan @ Sabarivasan vs The Inspector Of Police on 9 January, 2019

7.In this regard, it is relevant to refer the judgment of the learned Single Judge of this Court, in Sabari v. Inspector of Police reported in 2019 (3) MLJ Crl 110, wherein the learned single Judge had discussed in detail about the cases in which persons of the age group of 16 to 18 years are involved in love affairs and how in some cases ultimately end up in a criminal case booked for an offence under the POSCO Act. The relevant portions of the judgment are extracted hereunder for proper appreciation:-
Madras High Court Cites 19 - Cited by 76 - V Parthiban - Full Document

The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Dhruv Gurjar on 22 February, 2019

10.The main issue that requires the consideration of this Court is as to whether this Court can quash the criminal proceedings involving non- compoundable offences pending against the petitioner. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Parbathbhai Aahir @ Parbathbhai Vs. State of Gujrath, reported in 2017 9 SCC 641 and in case of The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Dhruv Gurjar and Another reported in (2019) 2 MLJ Crl 10, has given sufficient guidelines that must be taken into consideration by this Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Section Page No.8 of 12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.O.P.No.9691 of 2022 482 of Cr.P.C, to quash non-compoundable offences. One very important test that has been laid down is that the Court must necessarily examine if the crime in question is purely individual in nature or a crime against the society with overriding public interest. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that offences against the society with overriding public interest even if it gets settled between the parties, cannot be quashed by this Court.
Supreme Court of India Cites 26 - Cited by 1397 - M R Shah - Full Document
1