Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.77 seconds)R. P. Kapur vs The State Of Punjab on 25 March, 1960
An argument was advanced that what is prohibitive in the Code should not be considered permissive so as to exercise inherent power of High Court Under Section 482. This proposition in its abstract form is no doubt correct. But there may be a case where, in the language of their Lordships in R. P. Kapur v. State of Punjab , it manifestly appears that there is a legal bar against the institution or continuance of the criminal proceedings in respect of the offence alleged ....................
Article 227 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 420 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Budaraju Seshagiri Rao And Ors. vs T.V. Sarma And Anr. on 16 September, 1975
In Budaraju Seshagiri Rao v. T.V. Sarma, 1976 Cri LJ 902 (Andh Pra), O. Chinnappa Reddy, observed :-
Section 397 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Sant Lal vs Krishan Lal on 25 July, 1975
Sant Lal's case was followed by D.S. Lamba, J., in Gurbachan Singh v. Dr. Didar Singh, (197-6) 3 Cri LT 506 (Punj & Har).
Sarjoo And Ors. vs Babadin And Anr. on 23 April, 1975
6. Learned Counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on Sarjoo v. Babadin, 1975 Cri LJ 1562(All), a Single Bench decision of the Allahabad High Court. There, an order passed by an Executive Magistrate was assailed in revision, but unsuccessfully, before the Sessions Judge. The second revision petition was barred by Section 397(3) but the learned Judge held that inherent powers of the High Court Under Section 482 of the Code could still be invoked to set aside the impugned order. In view of the rulings discussed in the preceding paragraphs, with due respects I am unable to follow the Allahabad view.
1