Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 12 (0.22 seconds)Section 216 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 379 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 461 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 211 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Nupur Talwar vs Cbi & Anr on 7 June, 2012
4. Mr. Hemant Kumar Shikarwar, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the witnesses have disclosed that there were some theft from
the shop of the petitioner. By way of referring chargesheet, he submits that
in the chargesheet, materials are there to take cognizance under Sections
379 and 461 of the Indian Penal Code. He further submits that the
revisional order is bad in law on the ground that it has been discussed in
the revisional order that the order in question is not a final order and it is an
intermediate order. By way of referring the judgment rendered in the case
of Rajendra Prasad v. Bashir & others, reported in (2001) 8 SCC 522,
he submits that the learned Magistrate is having power to take cognizance
3
in terms of provisions as contained in Section 193 Cr.P.C. He further relied
upon the judgment rendered in the case of Nupur Talwar v. C.B.I.,
reported in (2012) 3 SCC 188 and in the case of SWIL v. State of Delhi
& others, reported in (2001) 6 SCC 670.
Rajinder Prasad vs Bashir & Ors on 19 September, 2001
4. Mr. Hemant Kumar Shikarwar, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the witnesses have disclosed that there were some theft from
the shop of the petitioner. By way of referring chargesheet, he submits that
in the chargesheet, materials are there to take cognizance under Sections
379 and 461 of the Indian Penal Code. He further submits that the
revisional order is bad in law on the ground that it has been discussed in
the revisional order that the order in question is not a final order and it is an
intermediate order. By way of referring the judgment rendered in the case
of Rajendra Prasad v. Bashir & others, reported in (2001) 8 SCC 522,
he submits that the learned Magistrate is having power to take cognizance
3
in terms of provisions as contained in Section 193 Cr.P.C. He further relied
upon the judgment rendered in the case of Nupur Talwar v. C.B.I.,
reported in (2012) 3 SCC 188 and in the case of SWIL v. State of Delhi
& others, reported in (2001) 6 SCC 670.