Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.26 seconds)
Milind Aniruddha Buddhisagar And ... vs The Dharampeth Mahila Multi State ... on 17 April, 2024
cites
Section 202 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 145 in The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 [Entire Act]
Section 141 in The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 [Entire Act]
Section 203 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Vijay Dhanuka Etc vs Najima Mamtaj Etc on 27 March, 2014
10. Whether the inquiry, as contemplated under Section
202 of the Cr.P.C., is directory or mandatory fell for
consideration before the Hon'ble Supreme Court time and again
in the decisions of Vijay Dhanuka (supra), Abhijit Pawar (supra),
Birla Corporation Limited (supra) as well as Aroon Poorie
(supra), relied upon by the applicants, wherein it was held that
when an accused resides beyond the area in which the Magistrate
before whom the complaint is made exercises his jurisdiction, the
inquiry that is to be held by the Magistrate before issuance of
summons to the accused, cannot be dispensed with. When the
TAMBE
J APL-32-2024.odt
9
Magistrate comes to a conclusion after holding the said inquiry
that there are sufficient grounds to proceed against the accused,
he can issue the process. There is no dispute with respect to this
legal position.
Abhijit Pawar vs Hemant Madhukar Nimbalkar on 14 December, 2016
10. Whether the inquiry, as contemplated under Section
202 of the Cr.P.C., is directory or mandatory fell for
consideration before the Hon'ble Supreme Court time and again
in the decisions of Vijay Dhanuka (supra), Abhijit Pawar (supra),
Birla Corporation Limited (supra) as well as Aroon Poorie
(supra), relied upon by the applicants, wherein it was held that
when an accused resides beyond the area in which the Magistrate
before whom the complaint is made exercises his jurisdiction, the
inquiry that is to be held by the Magistrate before issuance of
summons to the accused, cannot be dispensed with. When the
TAMBE
J APL-32-2024.odt
9
Magistrate comes to a conclusion after holding the said inquiry
that there are sufficient grounds to proceed against the accused,
he can issue the process. There is no dispute with respect to this
legal position.
Birla Corporation Ltd. vs Adventz Investments And Holdings Ltd. on 9 May, 2019
10. Whether the inquiry, as contemplated under Section
202 of the Cr.P.C., is directory or mandatory fell for
consideration before the Hon'ble Supreme Court time and again
in the decisions of Vijay Dhanuka (supra), Abhijit Pawar (supra),
Birla Corporation Limited (supra) as well as Aroon Poorie
(supra), relied upon by the applicants, wherein it was held that
when an accused resides beyond the area in which the Magistrate
before whom the complaint is made exercises his jurisdiction, the
inquiry that is to be held by the Magistrate before issuance of
summons to the accused, cannot be dispensed with. When the
TAMBE
J APL-32-2024.odt
9
Magistrate comes to a conclusion after holding the said inquiry
that there are sufficient grounds to proceed against the accused,
he can issue the process. There is no dispute with respect to this
legal position.