Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 39 (0.40 seconds)
Bharatendu Pratap Singh vs State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home ... on 29 January, 2025 cites

Vinay Tyagi vs Irshad Ali @ Deepak & Ors on 13 December, 2012

15. The Sessions Judge was justified in setting aside the order of the Magistrate for the simple reason that after the supplementary report submitted by the investigating officer, the Magistrate was duty bound in terms of the dictum in paragraph 42 of the decision in Vinay Tyagi (supra), as well as the subsequent three-Judge Bench decision in Vinubhai Haribhai Malaviya (supra) to consider both the original report and the supplementary report before determining the steps that have to be taken further in accordance with law. The Magistrate not having done so, it was necessary to restore the proceedings back to the Magistrate so that both the reports could be read conjointly by analyzing the cumulative effect of the reports and the documents annexed thereto, if any, while determining whether there existed grounds to presume that the appellants have committed the offence. The order of the Sessions Judge restoring the proceedings back to the Magistrate was correct to that extent.
Supreme Court of India Cites 41 - Cited by 658 - S Kumar - Full Document

Vinubhai Haribhai Malaviya vs The State Of Gujarat on 16 October, 2019

15. The Sessions Judge was justified in setting aside the order of the Magistrate for the simple reason that after the supplementary report submitted by the investigating officer, the Magistrate was duty bound in terms of the dictum in paragraph 42 of the decision in Vinay Tyagi (supra), as well as the subsequent three-Judge Bench decision in Vinubhai Haribhai Malaviya (supra) to consider both the original report and the supplementary report before determining the steps that have to be taken further in accordance with law. The Magistrate not having done so, it was necessary to restore the proceedings back to the Magistrate so that both the reports could be read conjointly by analyzing the cumulative effect of the reports and the documents annexed thereto, if any, while determining whether there existed grounds to presume that the appellants have committed the offence. The order of the Sessions Judge restoring the proceedings back to the Magistrate was correct to that extent.
Supreme Court of India Cites 84 - Cited by 274 - R F Nariman - Full Document

Luckose Zachariah @ Zak Nedumchira Luke vs Joseph Joseph on 18 February, 2022

23. Further submission is that this Court, vide judgment dated 26.05.2011 declined to interfere in the charge sheet No.317A and permitted to continue with further investigation and in this view of the matter the principle as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Vinay Tyagi Vs. Irshad Ali, (2013)5 SCC 462 and subsequent judgments including Luckose Zachariah alias Zak Nedumchira Luke (supra) would not apply in the instant case.
Supreme Court of India Cites 22 - Cited by 33 - D Y Chandrachud - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next