Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.29 seconds)
Rajesh Kumar vs The State on 22 November, 2022 cites

Rajesh Kumar vs State Th:Govt Of Nct Of Delhi on 28 September, 2011

5. It is further contended that with respect to the application seeking further investigation in the case FIR No. 755/14 filed by the complainant Usha Rani, notice was not issued to the revisionist, nor any copy of the application was furnished, thus Cr. Rev No.89/22 Page 2 of 9 Rajesh Kumar vs. State depriving, the revisionist an opportunity of being heard. Further, the application for further investigation was not forwarded by the Ld. APP for the State. Accordingly, the complainant Usha Rani has no locus standi to move an application to seek further investigation in the case.
Supreme Court of India Cites 39 - Cited by 169 - Full Document

Sri Bhagwan Samardha Sreepada ... vs State Of Andhra Pradesh & Ors on 15 July, 1999

10. It is relevant to mention in the judgment titled 'Sri Bhagwan Samardha Sreepada Vallabha Venkata Vishwanandha Maharaj vs. State of A.P. (1999) 5 SCC 740", wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that even after the court took cognizance of any offence on the strength of the police report first submitted, it is open to the police to conduct further investigation.
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 127 - Full Document

State Bank Of India Thro General Manager ... vs State Of Gujarat on 10 October, 2022

8. Apart from hearing the arguments, I have perused the trial court record as well as revision record meticulously. First and foremost I will deal with the contention of the Ld. Counsel for the revisionist that the impugned order was pronounced by the Ld. Trial Court two days before the actual date fixed for pronouncement of order. Perusal of the record shows that Ld. Trial Court had heard arguments of the parties, i.e. the State, Cr. Rev No.89/22 Page 4 of 9 Rajesh Kumar vs. State accused as well as the complainant on the application moved on behalf of the complainant Smt. Usha seeking further investigation in the case and the case was listed for orders/clarification, if any for 29.04.2022. The parties were given liberty to file further documents, if any, in support of their arguments at least two days prior to the next date of hearing. Pertinently, hearing of the arguments on both sides was concluded on 29.03.2022. The order in this case was announced by the Ld. Trial Court on 27.04.2022 after taking up the case in terms of the directions transfer order no. 15/DHC/Gaz./G­7/VI­ E­2(A)/22 dated 26.4.2022 to pass orders/judgment already reserved. It is apparently clear that the Ld. Trial Court was under
Gujarat High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1