Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.41 seconds)Suresh vs Mahadevappa Shivappa Danannava And Anr on 16 February, 2005
In [Suresh v. Mahadevappa Shivappa Danannava and Anr.] the Apex Court had considered the delay in lodging the complaint and dispute being of civil nature. However, in that case, there was absence of ingredients of the alleged offence of cheating. Here the allegation against the applicant is that he had furnished false documents to get grants. If this is so, it appears to be fraudulent and dishonest intention on the part of the applicant to get these grants though not entitled and therefore, it can not be said that merely because the applicant has re-couped the excess grants with penalty, he had no fraudulent intention or dishonest intention while claiming those grants. In my opinion, delay in lodging the charge sheet which in this case appears to be only after the matter was considered by the Division Bench of this Court, can not lead to the quashing of the same.
K.C. Builders & Anr vs The Assistant Commissioner Of Income ... on 28 January, 2004
6. As contended by the learned Counsel for the applicant, in view of 2003 Cr.L.J. 3041 [Hira Lal Hari Lal Bhagwati v. C.B.I., New Delhi] and [K.C. Buliders and Anr. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, when the offences are allowed to be compounded and no prosecution can be lodged, once the matter has been settled by the concerned department. Since criminal liability stood compounded on settlement with respect to the civil issues , F.I.R. was erroneous and unwarranted and therefore, continuation of the proceedings would tantamount to double jeopardy. The accused cannot be required to undergo agony of criminal trial.
Hira Lal Hari Lal Bhagwati vs C.B.I., New Delhi on 2 May, 2003
6. As contended by the learned Counsel for the applicant, in view of 2003 Cr.L.J. 3041 [Hira Lal Hari Lal Bhagwati v. C.B.I., New Delhi] and [K.C. Buliders and Anr. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, when the offences are allowed to be compounded and no prosecution can be lodged, once the matter has been settled by the concerned department. Since criminal liability stood compounded on settlement with respect to the civil issues , F.I.R. was erroneous and unwarranted and therefore, continuation of the proceedings would tantamount to double jeopardy. The accused cannot be required to undergo agony of criminal trial.
Section 420 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 482 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 227 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 34 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
1