Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 33 (0.94 seconds)Section 420 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 16 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 120B in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 420 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 82 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Sarabjit Kaur vs The State Of Punjab on 1 March, 2023
"9. However, we do not find the need to engage with the grounds
as urged, because a perusal of the record in no uncertain terms reflects the
dispute as being of a civil nature. This Court recently, in Sarabjit Kaur V.
State of Punjab observed that : (SCC p. 363, para 13)
"13. A breach of contract does not give rise to criminal prosecution for
cheating unless fraudulent or dishonest intention is shown right at the
beginning of the transaction. Merely on the allegation of failure to keep up
promise will not be enough to initiate criminal proceedings."
Paramjeet Batra vs State Of Uttarakhand & Ors on 14 December, 2012
In the case of Paramjeet Batra v. State of Uttarakhand, (2013) 11 SCC
673, this Court recognized that although the inherent powers of a High
Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure should be
exercised sparingly, yet the High Court must not hesitate in quashing such
criminal proceedings which are essentially of a civil nature: This is what
was held:
Vesa Holdings P.Ltd.& Anr vs State Kerala & Ors on 17 March, 2015
In view of above facts, reasons and analysis the Court comes to
a definite conclusion that to allow the proceeding will amount the abuse of
process of law and accordingly, the entire criminal proceeding including
order taking cognizance dated 26.08.2022 and order dated 20.03.2021 by
which process under section 82 of Cr.P.C. has been issued against the
12
petitioners, in connection with Argora P.S. Case No. 101 of 2020, pending in the
Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Ranchi are quashed.
Vijay Kumar Ghai vs The State Of West Bengal on 22 March, 2022
In Vijay Kumar Ghal v. State of W.B.2, one of us, (Krishna Murari J.)
observed in reference to earlier decisions as under: (SCC pp. 139- 40,
paras 24-25)
"24.