Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 31 (0.21 seconds)Section 420 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 34 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 120B in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Mahesh Choudhary vs State Of Rajasthan & Anr on 3 March, 2009
The Supreme Court in the case of Mahesh
Chaudhary vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. reported in
(2009) 4 SCC 439 has held as under:-
Kamaladevi Agarwal vs State Of West Bengal And Ors. on 17 October, 2001
In Kamaladevi Agarwal vs. State of
W.B. (2002) 1 SCC 555, this Court opined:
B. Suresh Yadav vs Sharifa Bee & Anr on 12 October, 2007
15. This Court in B. Suresh Yadav vs.
Sharifa Bee (2007) 13 SCC 107 opined as
under:
R. Kalyani vs Janak C. Mehta & Ors on 24 October, 2008
16. Recently in R. Kalyani vs. Janak C.
Mehta (2008) 14 SCALE 85, this Court laid
down the law in the following terms: (SCC
p.523, paras 15-16)
"15. Propositions of law which
emerge from the said decisions are:
Alpic Finance Ltd vs P. Sadasivan And Anr on 16 February, 2001
16. It is furthermore well known
that no hard-and-fast rule can be laid
down. Each case has to be considered on
its own merits. The Court, while exercising
its inherent jurisdiction, although would
not interfere with a genuine complaint
MCRC No.3593/2016
6
keeping in view the purport and object for
which the provisions of Sections 482 and
483 of the Code of Criminal Procedure had
been introduced by the Parliament but
would not hesitate to exercise its
jurisdiction in appropriate cases. One of
the paramount duties of the superior
courts is to see that a person who is
apparently innocent is not subjected to
persecution and humiliation on the basis of
a false and wholly untenable complaint."
The Supreme Court in the case of Alpic Finance Ltd.
vs. Sadasivan & Anr. reported in (2001) 3 SCC 513 has
held as under:-
Smt. Nagawwa vs Veeranna Shivallngappa Konjalgi on 23 April, 1976
In Nagawwa vs.
Veeranna Shivalingappa Konjalgi (1976) 3
SCC 736, it was held that the Magistrate
while issuing process against the accused
should satisfy himself as to whether the
allegations in the complaint, if proved,
would ultimately end in the conviction of
the accused. It was held that the order of
Magistrate issuing process against the
accused could be quashed under the
following circumstances: (SCC p.741, para