Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.38 seconds)
State Of Maharashtra & Ors vs Ishwar Piraji Kalpatri on 30 November, 1995 cites

K. Veeraswami vs Union Of India And Others on 25 July, 1991

In K.P.S. Gill's case (supra), it was, inter alia, observed, that "we also give a note of caution to the effect that the power of quashing a criminal proceeding should be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection and that too in the rarest of rare cases; that the Court will not be justified in embarking upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the First Information Report or the complaint and that the extra-ordinary or inherent power do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the Court to act according to its whim or caprice".
Supreme Court of India Cites 91 - Cited by 259 - K J Shetty - Full Document

Mrs. Rupan Deol Bajaj & Anr vs Kanwar Pal Singh Gill & Anr on 12 October, 1995

In support of his contention, learned counsel has relied on the following decisions, namely; K.Veeraswami Vs. Union of India and others, (1991)3 SCC 655, State of Bihar and other Vs. P.P.Sharma, IAS and another, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 222, Minakshi Bala Vs. Sudhir Kumar and others, (1994) 4 SCC 142 and Mrs, Ruoan Deol Bajaj & Anr, Vs. Kanwar Pal Singh Gill and another, JT 1995 (7) SC 299. It was also contended that the learned Single Judge had not only erred in law in quashing the prosecution but had also not appreciated the facts, on record, correctly.
Supreme Court of India Cites 33 - Cited by 877 - M K Mukherjee - Full Document
1