Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.63 seconds)Willie (William) Slaney vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 31 October, 1955
The object of a charge is to warn an
accused person of the case he is to answer. It
cannot be treated as if it was a part of a
ceremonial. If this be the purpose of the
charge, reference to the provisions contained in
Chapter XVII as to the various forms and
modes of framing a charge or joinder of
charges and joinder of persons to be tried at
one trial are beside the point. The importance of
-7-
WP No. 16851 of 2022
framing the charge need not be over-emphasised
and that this should be shunned becomes apparent
from the observations of Bose J. in William Elaney v.
The State of Madhya Pradesh which reads as under:-
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 3 in The Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 [Entire Act]
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Section 2 in The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Section 3 in The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
V C Ram Mohan vs Central Bureau Of Investigation on 20 August, 2019
8. Reference being made to the judgment of the Apex
Court in the case of V.C.SHUKLA VS. STATE THROUGH
C.B.I1, the circumstances, becomes apposite.
1980 Supp Supreme Court Cases 921
The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988
1