Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (1.27 seconds)Section 406 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 82 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
State Of Punjab & Others vs Parshotam Dass & Another on 2 August, 2010
23),, passed by the Court of learned S
Sub
ub Divisional Judicial Magistrate,
Garhshankar in case titled as State of Punjab vs. Parshotam Sharma and
another, arising out of FIR No. 113 dated 19.06.2020, registered under
Sections 420 and 406 of IPC at Police Station Garhshankar, Hoshiarpur,
Hoshiarpur
whereby the petitioner had been declared a proclaimed offender,, is quashed
with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom.
Section 482 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Dr. Rohit Kumar vs Secretary Office Of Lt. Governor Of ... on 15 July, 2021
in this regard can be placed upon Rohit Kumar Vs. State of Delhi : 2008 Crl.
J. 2561.
Gurappa Gugal And Ors. vs State Of Mysore on 11 June, 1968
7. Further,
ther, a perusal of the statement of serving police official
reveals that the proclamation was executed only on 05.01.2025 requiring the
petitioner to cause his appearance before the learned trial Court on
07.01.2025, which means that the petitioner was not granted mandatory period
of 30 days to cause his appearance before the trial Court. Hence, the same was
in clear violation of the provisions of Section 82(1) Cr.P.C., as per which, a
specified time of not less than 30 days is required to be given to the aaccused
ccused
from the date of publishing such proclamation which is mandatory in nature.
Reliance in this regard can be placed upon Gurappa Gugal and others Vs.
State of Mysore : 1969 CriLJ 826 and Shokat Ali Vs. State of Haryna :
1