Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.21 seconds)Section 420 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 467 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 468 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Section 482 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 190 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 161 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Md.Ibrahim & Ors vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 4 September, 2009
On the above premise, learned counsel for applicant submits that order impugned in present application is manifestly illegal and without jurisdiction. Concerned Magistrate, had no jurisdiction to decide the veracity of the police report dated 30.12.2013, which is a final report inasmuch as the said police report was itself rejected by concerned Superintendent of Police vide order dated 26.3.2014. No protest petition was filed by first informant/opposite party-2 against police report dated 16.3.2015 (second final report) therefore, there was no occasion before the concerned Magistrate to consider the veracity or otherwise of the first Police report. It is next contended that applicant is a bonafide purchaser in good faith after payment of due consideration of the land in dispute. Since applicant has neither forged nor manufactured any document, consequently, no offence as alleged in the F.I.R. can be said to have been committed by applicant. To buttress his submission, he has relied upon the judgements of Supreme Court in Mohammad Ibrahim and Others Vs. State of Bihar and Another, reported in 2009 (8) SCC 751 and Sheila Sebastain Vs. R. Jawar Raj and another, reported in 2018 (7) SCC 581. On the aforesaid premise, he contends that present criminal proceedings are not only illegal but also an abuse of process of Court and therefore, same are liable to be quashed by this Court.
Himanshu And Another vs Sudhanshu And 2 Ors. on 18 April, 2022
4. Few of the accused persons namely Sudhanshu Kulshrestha, Ashok Ved, Samar Singh and Vinod Prakash opposite party nos.2 to 5 in the present application filed revision challenging the summoning order being Criminal Revision No.37 of 2021 before the court below and the aforesaid revision has been decided by order dated 17.01.2024 vide which the summoning order dated 19.03.2021 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Firozabad in Misc. Case No.105 of 2014 (Himanshu vs. Sudhanshu and Others) related to Case Crime No. 530 of 2013, Police Station- Tundla District- Firozabad was set-aside. While setting-aside the aforesaid summoning order, the learned Magistrate has also directed the Chief Judicial Magistrate to pass fresh orders in the light of observations made by the revisional court. Challenging the aforesaid order, informant Himanshu Kulshrestha has filed the present application.
1