Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 26 (0.28 seconds)Section 3 in The Essential Commodities Act, 1955 [Entire Act]
Section 482 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
State Of Haryana And Ors vs Ch. Bhajan Lal And Ors on 21 November, 1990
"7. The legal position regarding the exercise of
powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. or under Article
226 of the Constitution of India by the High Court
in relation to pending criminal proceedings
including FIRs under investigation is fairly well
settled by a long line of decisions of this Court.
Suffice it to say that in cases where the complaint
lodged by the complainant whether before a Court
or before the jurisdictional police station makes
out the commission of an offence, the High Court
would not in the ordinary course invoke its powers
to quash such proceedings except in rare and
compelling circumstances enumerated in the
decision of this Court in State of Haryana v. Ch.
Bhajan Lal 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335."
Tarsem Singh vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 16 September, 1996
In this situation, the liability
of a marketing company does not arise as is apparent from the judgments of
this Court in Manoj Grover (supra), Kehar Singh (supra), Ghanvir Singh
(supra) and M/s Tata Chemicals Ltd. (supra). The liability if any would lie
with the manufacturing company.
Arun Kumar And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another on 1 September, 2014
In Arun Kumar and others versus State of
Punjab, 1995 (3) RCR (Criminal) 231, the
appellants were partners of firm M/s Mangat Ram
& Sons, Faridkot. On 27.6.1984 the Chief
Agricultural Officer visited the shop of the
appellants and found that they were in possession
of 273 bags of NFL fertilizer. The Chief
Agricultural Office took a sample of the fertilizer
from a bag and sent it to the laboratory for
analysis. The Analyst found that the sample was
deficient in respect of Nitrogen and Amonical
Nitrogen and therefore, a case was registered as
FIR No. 135 dated 8.11.1984, Police Station,
Kotwali Faridkot under Section 7 of the Act and
after trial, Special Court convicted and sentenced
the accused for the offence under Section 7 of the
Act. In appeal, this court observed as under:
State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Awadh Kishore Gupta And Ors on 18 November, 2003
"...The powers possessed by the High Court
under Section 482 of the Code are very wide
and the very plenitude of the power requires
great caution in its exercise. Court must be
careful to see that its decision in exercise of
this power is based on sound principles. The
inherent power should not be exercised to
stifle a legitimate prosecution. High Court
being the highest Court of a State should
normally refrain from giving a prima facie
decision in a case where the entire facts are
incomplete and hazy, more so when the
evidence has not been collected and produced
before the Court and the issues involved,
whether factual or legal, are of magnitude
and cannot be seen in their true perspective
without sufficient material. Of course, no
hard and fast rule can be laid down in regard
to cases in which the High Court will exercise
its extraordinary jurisdiction of quashing the
proceeding at any stage. It would not be
proper for the High Court to analyse the case
17 of 25
::: Downloaded on - 08-05-2024 06:15:24 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:063057
2024:PHHC:063057
CRM-M-4601-2019 (O&M) -18-
M/S Indian Oil Corporation vs M/S Nepc India Ltd., & Ors on 20 July, 2006
Enumerating the principles governing
invocation of the provisions of Section 482 of
the Code, Hon'ble the Supreme Court in
Indian Oil Corpn. V. NEPC India Ltd. ,(2006)
6 SCC 736, (at page 747) ruled as under:
Madhavrao Jiwaji Rao Scindia & Anr. Etc vs Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre & Ors. ... on 9 February, 1988
"12. The principles relating to exercise of
jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure to quash complaints and
criminal proceedings have been stated and
reiterated by this Court in several decisions.
To mention a few--Madhavrao Jiwajirao
Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre,
State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, Rupan Deol
Bajaj v. Kanwar Pal Singh Gill, Central
Bureau of Investigation v. Duncans Agro
Industries Ltd., State of Bihar v. Rajendra
18 of 25
::: Downloaded on - 08-05-2024 06:15:24 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:063057
2024:PHHC:063057
CRM-M-4601-2019 (O&M) -19-
Agrawalla, Rajesh Bajaj v. State NCT of
Delhi, Medchl Chemicals & Pharma (P) Ltd.
v. Biological E. Ltd., Hridaya Ranjan Prasad
Verma v. State of Bihar, M. Krishnan v. Vijay
Singh and Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd.
v. Mohd. Sharaful Haque.. The principles,
relevant to our purpose are:
Mrs. Rupan Deol Bajaj & Anr vs Kanwar Pal Singh Gill & Anr on 12 October, 1995
"12. The principles relating to exercise of
jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure to quash complaints and
criminal proceedings have been stated and
reiterated by this Court in several decisions.
To mention a few--Madhavrao Jiwajirao
Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre,
State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, Rupan Deol
Bajaj v. Kanwar Pal Singh Gill, Central
Bureau of Investigation v. Duncans Agro
Industries Ltd., State of Bihar v. Rajendra
18 of 25
::: Downloaded on - 08-05-2024 06:15:24 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:063057
2024:PHHC:063057
CRM-M-4601-2019 (O&M) -19-
Agrawalla, Rajesh Bajaj v. State NCT of
Delhi, Medchl Chemicals & Pharma (P) Ltd.
v. Biological E. Ltd., Hridaya Ranjan Prasad
Verma v. State of Bihar, M. Krishnan v. Vijay
Singh and Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd.
v. Mohd. Sharaful Haque.. The principles,
relevant to our purpose are: