Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.59 seconds)

Iqbal Singh Marwah & Anr vs Meenakshi Marwah & Anr on 11 March, 2005

(v) Latika Kumari Vs. Government of U.P. and Ors.5; (vi) Iqbal Singh Marwah and Anr. Vs. Meenakshi Marwah and Anr.6. 7) Mr. Girish Kulkarni, learned Senior Counsel for the Respondent No.2 submitted that, there is sufficient compliance of the provisions of 1 (2015)6 SCC 287. 2 Criminal Petition No.7866/2022 a/w. Criminal Petition No.833/2023 (Karnataka High Court). 3 Special Leave Petition (Cril.) No.8931-8932/2023 arising out of Criminal Petition No. 7866/2022 a/w. Criminal Petition No. 833 of 2023. 4 Criminal Appeal No.252 of 2022 (Supreme Court for quashing) 5 Criminal Writ Petition No. 68/2008 (Supreme Court) 6 Criminal Appeal No. 402/2005 (Supreme Court) 6/13 ::: Uploaded on - 23/02/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 07/03/2024 16:08:30 ::: V.A. Tikam WP 3240 of 2014.doc
Supreme Court of India Cites 49 - Cited by 822 - G P Mathur - Full Document

Sayed Anwar Ahmed And Anr vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 28 February, 2017

12) Our conclusion above is well supported by the settled position of law and as has been enunciated by this Court in the case of Sayed Anwar Ahmed & Anr. vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. : 2017 SCC OnLine 3972 that, "While dealing with a complaint seeking an action under Sub-Section (3) of Section 156 of Cr.P.C, the learned Magistrate cannot act mechanically. He is required to apply his mind to the contents of the Complaint and the documents produced along with the Complaint. An Order passed on the said complaint must record reasons in brief which should indicate application of mind by the Magistrate. However, it not necessary to record detailed reasons. The power under Sub-Section (3) of Section 156 is discretionary. Only because on plain reading of the Complaint, a case of commission of cognizable offence is made out, an Order of investigation should not be 10/13 ::: Uploaded on - 23/02/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 07/03/2024 16:08:30 ::: V.A. Tikam WP 3240 of 2014.doc mechanically passed. In a given case, the learned Magistrate can go in to the issue of the veracity of the allegations made in the complaint. The learned Magistrate must also consider the other relevant aspects such as the inordinate delay on the part of the Complainant. The nature of the transaction and pendency of civil proceedings on the subject are also relevant considerations. Necessary averments recording compliance with Sub-Sections (1) and (3) of Section 154 of the Cr.P.C. should be incorporated with material particulars. Moreover, the documents in support of the said averments must be filed on record".
Bombay High Court Cites 26 - Cited by 16 - Full Document

Priyanka Srivastava & Anr vs State Of U.P.& Ors on 19 March, 2015

Since it has not been stated that the ruling will have a prospective effect, the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Priyanka Srivastava and Anr. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. (supra) will have a retrospective effect and this was absolutely elementary and this Court fails to understand as to how the Court below missed this simple concept".
Supreme Court of India Cites 32 - Cited by 1448 - D Misra - Full Document

Kamla Bai @ Priyanka Srivastava vs State Of U.P. on 29 August, 2022

Such an affidavit is not necessary in this case because the complaint was filed before the date of the decision in the case of Priyanka Srivastava (supra), therefore, this reported decision has no retrospective effect. The offence stated in the complaint is clearly made out against the Petitioner. There is nothing wrong with the impugned Order as the same is passed with proper application of mind as required by law. As such, there is no substance in the submissions advanced on behalf of the Petitioner, therefore, the Petition may be dismissed.
Allahabad High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 4 - Siddharth - Full Document
1   2 Next