Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.21 seconds)Section 63B in The Copyright Act, 1957 [Entire Act]
Section 63 in The Copyright Act, 1957 [Entire Act]
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Section 155 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
State Of M.P vs Deshraj & Ors on 29 January, 2004
17. Resultantly, this criminal misc. petition is allowed. The
impugned FIR No.414/2015 of Police Station, Tapukra, District
Alwar filed against the petitioner as well as the subsequent
proceedings pending before the judicial Magistrate, Tijara, District
Alwar in criminal case No.23.11.2016 (State Vs. Deshraj) whereby
cognizance has been taken against the petitioner is quashed.
Rajeev Chaudhary vs State (N.C.T.) Of Delhi on 4 May, 2001
13. Hence, as per the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court
in Rajeev Chaudhary's case (supra) and by Andhra Pradesh High
Court in Amarnath Vyas's case (supra), the expression
"imprisonment for a term which may extend up to 3 years" would
not come within the expression "imprisonment for 3 years and
upwards". Therefore, the offence punishable under sections 63,
63B and 65 the Act of 1957 cannot be considered as cognizable
offence.
Amarnath Vyas vs State Of A.P. on 19 December, 2006
13. Hence, as per the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court
in Rajeev Chaudhary's case (supra) and by Andhra Pradesh High
Court in Amarnath Vyas's case (supra), the expression
"imprisonment for a term which may extend up to 3 years" would
not come within the expression "imprisonment for 3 years and
upwards". Therefore, the offence punishable under sections 63,
63B and 65 the Act of 1957 cannot be considered as cognizable
offence.