Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.29 seconds)Section 406 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 138 in The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 [Entire Act]
The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
Section 420 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
M/S Thermax Ltd.& Ors vs K.M.Johny & Ors on 27 September, 2011
In Thermax Limited (supra), the Supreme Court
considered an appeal directed against the order of the Division
Bench of the High Court dismissing the writ petition filed by
the Thermax Limited as being misconstrued. Noticing the fact
that there were disputes with regard to the liability to pay by
Thermax Limited with such company not having any intention
of not paying, in the facts of that case, the Supreme Court
quashed the criminal complaint. The Supreme Court also
noted the fact that the complaint was belatedly lodged in the
year 2002 in respect of disputes pertaining to the period from
1993 to 1995. The disputes relate to purchase orders with the
liability of Thermax Limited yet to be determined. In the facts
of the present case, it cannot be said that there were disputes
6
between the private parties with regard to the quantum
involved.
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Lalita Kumari vs Govt.Of U.P.& Ors on 12 November, 2013
In Lalita Kumari (supra), the Supreme Court is of the
view that where information received does not disclose
cognizable offence a preliminary inquiry may be conducted. In
the facts of the present case, the police complaint lodged by
the de-facto complainant against the petitioner, in substance,
cannot be said not to disclose commission of a cognizable
offence. Section 406 of the IPC is a continuing offence. It
cannot be said with any certitude that there is no dishonest
intention of the petitioner to deceive the de facto complainant.
1