Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.28 seconds)Section 67 in The Information Technology Act, 2000 [Entire Act]
Section 509 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Section 354A in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Kishori Lal vs State Of M.P on 19 June, 2007
The aforesaid provision was interpreted in Kishori Lal v.
State of M.P., reported in (2007) 10 SCC 797 by the Hon'ble Apex Court
which in para 6 has held thus -
Section 354 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 482 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 2 in The Information Technology Act, 2000 [Entire Act]
State Of Haryana And Ors vs Ch. Bhajan Lal And Ors on 21 November, 1990
In terms of the decision of the Hon'ble
Apex Court in case of State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal [1992 Supp.(1)
SCC 335], the power under Section 482 can be exercised by this Court,
where the allegations made in the FIR, even if they are taken at their
face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute
any offence or make out a case against the accused. Taking an overall
KHUNTE
::: Uploaded on - 06/05/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 30/08/2021 13:59:51 :::
13/13 APL-573.16 (1).odt-Judgment
view of the matter, we are satisfied that even if allegations in the First
Information Report are accepted as correct, and considering the
material in the form of charge-sheet on its face value, it does not
disclose essential ingredients of offences alleged against the applicant
under sections 354-A(1)(iv), 509 and 107 of the Indian Penal Code and
section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000. We are therefore
satisfied that continuation of present proceedings against the applicant
would amount to abuse of process of Court.
1