Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.23 seconds)
Sugriv vs Murat Singh S/O Sh. Dal Chand on 29 August, 2013 cites

Smt. Nagawwa vs Veeranna Shivallngappa Konjalgi on 23 April, 1976

12. However, the Ld counsel for the respondents has argued that even in the above judgment in case of Smt. Nagawwa, Supra, it has been observed by the Hon' b le Supreme Court that for forming an opinion about the summoning of the accused, the court can take into consideration the inherent, improbabilities appearing on the face of the complaint or in the evidence led by the complainant in support of the allegations. He has also argued that the contents of the complaint and the evidence led by the petitioner before the court of Ld ACMM cannot be apparently be believed and as the same lack reliability and are full of material contradictions, which make the happening of the alleged incident to be doubtful and improbable, as claimed by the petitioner.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 1869 - S M Ali - Full Document

M/S. Pepsi Foods Ltd. & Anr vs Special Judicial Magistrate & Ors on 4 November, 1997

Ld counsel for the respondents has rightly referred to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Pepsi Food Ltd Vs. Special Judicial Magistrate (1998) 5 SCC 749, wherein the following observations were made " summoning of an accused in a criminal case is a serious matter. Criminal Law cannot be set into motion as a matter of course. It is not that the complainant has to bring only two witnesses to support his allegations in the complaint to have a criminal law set into motion. The order of the Magistrate summoning the accused must reflect that he has applied his mind to the facts of the case and the law applicable thereto. He has to examine the nature of allegations made in the complaint and the evidence both oral and documentary in support thereof and would that be sufficient for the complainant to succeed in bringing charge home to the accused. It is not that the Magistrate is a silent spectator at the time or recording of preliminary evidence before summoning of the accused. The Magistrate has to carefully scrutinize the evidence brought on record and may even himself put questions to the complainant and his witnesses to elicit answers to find out the truthfulness of the allegations or otherwise and then examine if any offence is prima facie committed by all or any of the accused " .
Supreme Court of India Cites 24 - Cited by 3106 - D P Wadhwa - Full Document

Sugriv Tyagi vs State on 1 May, 2012

copies of the of the judgment of the Ld Sessions Court dated 03.08.2011 and order on sentence dated 06.08.2011 in the above cross case SC No. 182/08, FIR No. 777/06 and the judgment dated 01.05.2012 of Hon' b le High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 1121/2011 titled Sugriv Tyagi Vs. State, arising out of the above decision, have also filed on record by Ld counsel for the respondents which show that the petitioner Sugriv herein, his wife Usha Devi, his daughter Mona Tyagi, his son Amit Tyagi and one Ravi Dutt Tyagi were put on trial in the above cross case and out of them, accused Amit Tyagi was tried as a juvenile and the accused Mona Tyagi and Ravi Dutt Tyagi were acquitted giving benefit of doubt, but the accused/petitioner Sugriv and his wife Usha Devi were convicted in the above case. Though the wife of the accused was given the benefit of probation of good conduct, but the petitioner herein was sentenced to RI for a period of 3 years and a fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default SI for 6 months for offence U/s 325 IPC, vide the above judgment dated 03.08.2011 and order on sentence dated 06.08.2011 of Ld ASJ. Though the petitioner had preferred the above appeal before the Hon'ble High Court against the above judgment, but in appeal, he had not challenged his conviction on merits and hence, his conviction was upheld and his sentence was reduced to the period of imprisonment already undergone by him and some fine, vide the above judgment dated 01.05.2012 of the Hon'ble High Court.
Delhi High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 1 - P Rani - Full Document
1