Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 48 (1.82 seconds)Section 482 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Nagendra Nath Bora & Another vs The Commissioner Of Hills Divisionand ... on 7 February, 1958
This position of law was reiterated in Nagendra Nath Bora v.
Commr. Of Hills Division and Appeals [AIR 1958 SC 398].
Waryam Singh And Another vs Amarnath And Another on 19 January, 1954
"In Waryam Singh v. Amarnath [AIR 1954 SC 215] this Court held that
power of superintendence conferred by Article 227 is to be exercised more
sparingly and only in appropriate cases in order to keep the subordinate
courts within the bounds of their authority and not for correcting mere
errors.
Dalmia Jain Airways Ltd. vs Sukumar Mukherjee on 30 August, 1950
The
Court approved the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Dalmia Jain
Airways Ltd. vs. Sukumar Mukherjee [AIR 1951 Cal 193] where the
High Court said that the power of superintendence conferred by Article
227 was to be exercised most sparingly and only in appropriate cases in
order to keep the subordinate courts within the bounds of their authority
and not for correcting their mere errors.
Industrial Credit And Investment ... vs Grapco Industries Ltd. And Ors on 14 May, 1999
Under Article 226, the power of interference may extend to quashing an
impugned order on the ground of a mistake apparent on the face of the
record. But under Article 227 of the Constitution, the power of
interference is limited to seeing that the tribunal functions within the
limits of its authority. " (emphasis supplied)
In the case of Industrial Credit and Investment Corporation of India Ltd versus
Grapco Industries Ltd and others reported in (1999) 4 SCC 710 it has been held that there
is no bar on the High Court examining merits of a case in exercise of its jurisdiction
under Article 227 of the Constitution of India if the circumstances so require. It has been
held that, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the High Court can even
interfere with interim orders of Courts and Tribunal's if the order is made without
jurisdiction.
K.P. Roy vs D. Rudra, District Magistrate, Howrah on 6 March, 1971
In the case of Roy V. D. versus State of Kerala reported in (2000) 8 SCC 590 the
question was whether arrest and search by an officer not empowered or authorised and
therefore in violation of sections 41 and 42 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances Act, 1985 was per se illegal and would vitiate trial. This Court held that when
Criminal proceedings are initiated on the basis of material collected on search and arrest
which are per se illegal, power under Section 482 can be exercised to quash the
proceedings as continuance of such proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of
the Court.
Puran, Shekhar And Anr vs Rambilas & Anr., State Of Maharashtra & ... on 3 May, 2001
In the case of Puran versus Rambilas and another reported in (2001) 6 SCC 338
this Court has held that the High Court's inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 is not
affected by the provisions of Section 397 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is held
that the High Court can interfere even if the order is an interlocutory order. It is held that
for securing the end of justice the High Court can interfere with an order which causes
miscarriage of justice or is palpably illegal or is unjustified. It was also noticed that the
High Court may refuse to exercise jurisdiction, under Section 482, on the basis of self-
imposed restriction.