Judgments - Quashing of Criminal Proceedings
Hari Dutt Tiwari Vs State Of U.P. & Another
STATE OF M.P. Vs. RAKESH MISHRA WITH State of Madhya Pradesh Versus Gyanendra Singh Jadon
Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. By the impugned judgment the High Court of Madhya Pradesh has allowed the three revision petitions, setting aside the orders of the First Additional Judge/ Special Judge, Indore, for framing charges against three accused persons, However, it would suffice to say that the law on this point is crystal clear that only charge-sheet along with the accompanying material is Full Judgment
HMT WATCHES LTD. Vs. M.A. ABIDA & ANR
Whether the cheques were given as security or not, or whether there was outstanding liability or not is a question of fact which could have been determined only by the trial court after recording evidence of the parties. In our opinion, the High Court should not have Full Judgment
Shokeen Vs State Of U.P.
Ramesh Handa Vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Man Chand @ Manik Chand Vs State Of U.P. & Another
RAVI PRAKASH SINGH @ ARVIND SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR
In State of M.P. v. Rustam and others[5], this Court has laid down the law that while computing period of ninety days, the day on which the accused was remanded to the judicial custody should be excluded, and the day on which challan is filed in the court, should be included. That being Full Judgment
Sonu Gupta Versus Deepak Gupta & Ors.
-At the stage of cognizance and summoning the Magistrate is required to apply his judicial mind only with a view to take cognizance of the offence, or, in other words, to find out whether prima facie case has been made out for summoning the accused persons. At this stage, the learned Magistrate is not required to consider the defence version or materials or Full Judgment
Rajkumar Sharma Vs Shriram Finance Co. Ltd
Victor Minj & Another Vs State of Chhattisgarh
J.L SOMAN & ORS VERSUS STATE OF BIHAR & ANR
Jitendra Raghuvanshi & Ors vs Babita Raghuvanshi & Anr
Udai Shankar Awasthi Vs State of U.P. & Anr.
CONTINUING OFFENCE: 10. Section 472 Cr.P.C. provides that in case of a continuing offence, a fresh period of limitation begins to run at every moment of the time period during which the offence continues. The expression, ‘continuing offence’ has not been defined in the Cr.P.C. because Full Judgment