Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 17 (0.29 seconds)Arnesh Kumar vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 2 July, 2014
"That the instant impugned proceeding is liable to
be quashed as it suffers from a grave irregularity
because the police authorities have registered the
F.I.R. being Cyber Police Station, Kolkata Case No.
93 of 2017 on 20.07.2017 and on the basis of
that issued the Sec. 41A Cr.P.C. notice on
07.01.2019 after an inexplicable an inordinate
delay of almost one and half years which itself
shakes the credibility and authenticity of the
investigation conducted by the Police Authorities
on the pretext of a fictitious written complaint
having a huge lacuna which is itself a flagrant
violation of the directions of the Hon'ble Apex
Court as laid down in the landmark case of
Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar reported in
(2014) 8/SCC 273 wherein it was directed that
the notice under Section 41A Cr.P.C. shall be
required to be served upon the accused person
with 14 days from the institution of the case."
Director General,Directorate General ... vs Anand Patwardhan & Anr on 25 August, 2006
".............The case hopelessly fails to pass the
test of obscenity, the conditions of which were laid
down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Directorate
General of Doordarshan & Ors. vs Anand
Patwardhan and Ors. reported in JT 2006(8) SC
255 and also relied upon the conditions laid down
in Regina vs Hicklins 1868-3 QB 360 which was
further enhanced by the Miller test's constitutional
standard of obscenity."
Arjun Panditrao Khotkar vs Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal on 14 July, 2020
"That in the light of the recent judgment
pronounced by the Hon'ble Apex Court on
14.07.2020 last in the case of Arjun Panditrao
Khotkar vs Kailash Kushanrao Govantyal and
Ors., reported in (2020) 7 SCC 1 the instant
proceeding is untenable in as such as Section 65
differentiates between existence, condition and
contents of a document. Section 65A speaks of
"contents" of electronic records being proved in
accordance with the provisions of Section 65B.
This provision speaks of "admissibility" of
electronic records which deals with "existence"
Section 506 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 509 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Section 67 in The Information Technology Act, 2000 [Entire Act]
Article 21 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Anvar P.V vs P.K.Basheer & Ors on 18 September, 2014
"That the impugned proceeding is liable to be
quashed in limine because neither printouts of the
messenger have been collected by the police
authorities nor certificates certifying them under
Section 65B of Evidence Act were issued; on the
5
contrary only CPRs of mobile no. was certified
and it has no connection with the offences alleged
and only if certificate under Section 65-B is
issued, question arises as to the genuineness of
the records and opinion of examiner of electronic
evidence is necessary as laid down by the
Hon'ble Apex Court."