Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.18 seconds)
Vicky @ Vivek vs State Of Mp on 1 December, 2020 cites

Vicky @ Vivek vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Judgement ... on 16 January, 2014

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC-47127-2020 (VICKY @ VIVEK Vs STATE OF MP) applicant has false been implicated in the present case and he has not committed any crime in any manner. It is further submitted that he is only a labour whose work is to comply with the directions issued by his employer. Allegation regarding misappropriation of funds is not attributable to him. It is pointed-out that the said offences which are registered against the applicant the maximum punishment is up to three years, they are cognizable offence and triable by Magistrate.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 4 - Full Document

Arnesh Kumar vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 2 July, 2014

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the pandemic situation of COVID-19 coupled with THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC-47127-2020 (VICKY @ VIVEK Vs STATE OF MP) the fact that offence under Section 406 is being registered against the present applicant and also looking to the fact that since the offence in question attracts punishment less than 7 years and therefore, in view of the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar (Supra), it is directed that in offences involving punishment upto seven years imprisonment the police may resort to the extreme step of arrest only when the same is necessary and the applicant do not cooperate in the investigation. The applicant should first be summoned to cooperate in the investigation. If the applicant cooperate in the investigation then the occasion of his arrest should not arise.
Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 25720 - Full Document
1