Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.28 seconds)
Sahadu Dagadu Satav And Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 21 June, 2019 cites

Sunil Bharti Mittal vs Cbi on 9 January, 2015

11. Learned counsel appearing for petitioners in support of aforesaid statements relied upon the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunil Bharti Mittal V. CBI reported in (2015) 4 Supreme Court Cases 609. It is submitted that, Sine qua non for taking cognizance of the offence is the application of mind by the Magistrate and his satisfaction that ::: Uploaded on - 04/07/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 14/07/2019 13:34:38 ::: Bhagyawant 8 Judgment wp 4470-17.doc the allegations, if proved, would constitute an offence. It is submitted that, in the impugned order no reasons are assigned before issuing the process against the petitioners.
Supreme Court of India Cites 36 - Cited by 797 - A K Sikri - Full Document

K.K. Ahuja vs V.K. Vora & Anr on 6 July, 2009

17. As already observed, the averments in the complaint fulfills the mandate of provisions of the said Act. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid judgment in para 34.2 has clearly held that on an over all reading of the complaint, the High Court can refuse to quash the complaint because the complaint contains the basic averments which is sufficient to make out a case against the Director. The Supreme Court in the case of K.K. Ahuja Vs. V.K. Vora & Anr. Reported in (2009) 10 Supreme Court Cases 48 in para 27 held as under:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 29 - Cited by 454 - R V Raveendran - Full Document
1