Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.32 seconds)

Dr. V.K.Vijayalekshmi Amma vs Bindu V on 2 December, 2009

9. Now comes the second pertinent question, as to whether the High Court, by invoking its inherent power under Section 482 of 2024:KER:93171 Crl.M.C.No.1370/2021 9 Cr.P.C can quash proceedings under the DV Act? It is true that in Dr. V.K.Vijayalekshmi Amma's case (supra), this Court held that in a complaint under Section 12(1) of the DV Act seeking relief under Sections 18 to 23, High Court could not exercise its extraordinary inherent power to quash the proceedings though such power is to be invoked to give effect to any order passed under the DV Act or to prevent abuse of process of any court or to secure the ends of justice when cognizance was taken by the Magistrate Court under Sections 31(1) or 33(1) of the DV Act.
Kerala High Court Cites 40 - Cited by 71 - S Nambiar - Full Document

Mathew Jacob Chakramakal @ Mahesh vs Seema Mathew on 17 April, 2021

5. Whereas it is submitted by the learned counsel for the 2 nd 2024:KER:93171 Crl.M.C.No.1370/2021 5 respondent Kunjumol Das that the Madras High Court in [2021 0 Supreme (Mad) 1133], Mathew Jacob Chakramakal @ Mahesh v. Seema Mathew, held that inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C could not be invoked to quash proceedings under the D.V Act.
1