Bank of Baroda Vs. State

Bank of Baroda vs State

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Aug 11, 1999

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/702441

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/702441
Court: Delhi High Court
Judge: Anil Dev Singh and; R.S. Sodhi, JJ.
Decided On: Aug 11, 1999
Case Number: Crl. W. No. 755 of 1999
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Key legal issue: Criminal
Acts & sections: Constitution of India - Article 226

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Bank of Baroda

Advocate S.K. Sharma and; Pankay Vivek, Advs

Respondent

State

Advocate K.C. Mittal, Standing Council

Legal References

Acts: Constitution of India - Article 226
Reported In: 82(1999)DLT326

Excerpt

- anil dev singh, j.1. notice. mr. mittal accepts notice on behalf of respondent. 2. petition can be disposed of at this stage itself. we have perused the complaint. it discloses the commission of a cognizable offence. accordingly, the concerned sho is directed to register fir on basis of the complaint. in the circumstances, we also consider it appropriate to direct that investigation should be conducted by an officer of the rank of asstt. commissioner of police, economic offences cell. we order accordingly. with above observations, writ petition is disposed of. dasti.

Full Judgment

Anil Dev Singh, J.

1. Notice. Mr. Mittal accepts notice on behalf of respondent.

2. Petition can be disposed of at this stage itself. We have perused the complaint. It discloses the commission of a cognizable offence. Accordingly, the concerned SHO is directed to register FIR on basis of the complaint. In the circumstances, we also consider it appropriate to direct that investigation should be conducted by an officer of the rank of Asstt. Commissioner of Police, Economic Offences Cell. We order accordingly. With above observations, writ petition is disposed of.

Dasti.

Same Court & Year Delhi · 1999 Same Parties Bank of Baroda vs State Same Subject Criminal Same Judge Anil Dev Singh and; R.S. Sodhi, JJ. Acts & Sections Constitution of India - Article 226

Criminal