Advanced Search Results

Vasantkumar Jivrambhai Majithia Vs. State of Maharashtra (at the Insta ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 107, 108, 109, 110, 111 to 116, 116(1), 116(2), 116(3), 145, 147, 251, 252 and 478 to 482; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 323 and 504; Constitution of India - Articles 21 and 227

Reported in : (2005)107BOMLR1149; 2006CriLJ1135

of the Constitution of India.2. The Division Bench has recommended that the State should take recourse to the Section 478 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by vesting the powers of Special Executive Magistrate in the Judicial … 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Code') is … are commonly known and relate to Section 108 to 110 as well as Section 145 and 147 of the Criminal Procedure code to be made over to Judicial Magistrate of the First Class or Metropolitan Magistrate, as the case may

K. Hanumantha Rao Vs. K. Narasimha Rao and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 41, 323, 324, 406, 408, 417, 419 and 420; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 222(4), 313, 468, 468(2), 469, 473 and 478

Reported in : 1982CriLJ734

Judge of the Calcutta High Court A. N. Banerjee, J. held : 'In my view the scheme in the Criminal Procedure Code does not provide for such an opportunity to an accused of being heard before consideration of the question … answer the reference it is necessary to notice the relevant provisions of the Cr.P.C. Chapter XXXVI of the code deals with limitation for taking cognizance of certain offences. 6. Section 468(1) enacts that no Court shall take … the Court must first see that S. 468 of the Code of 1973 is attracted or not. If it does, it should not register the … what point of time the Magistrate should exercise his discretion under S. 478, Cr.P.C. whether before he took cognizance of the offence or even during

Vijay Kumar and ors. Vs. State

Court : Delhi

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Prevention of Food Adulteration Act - Sections 5(2) and 16(1); Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 34, 109, 120B, 121A, 147, 148, 149, 186, 307, 324, 353, 420, 466, 467, 471 and 478; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 306, 306(4), 321, 361, 482 and 494; Explosive Act - Sections 4, 5 and 6

Reported in : 2007CriLJ4615

Pradeep Nandrajog, J.1. Vide above captioned 4 petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 a challenge is laid to the common order dated 30.1.2004 passed by the Additional … made by the Public Prosecutor for grant of consent to the withdrawal of prosecution under Section 494 of the Criminal Procedure Code. We have pointed out that the paramount consideration in all these cases must be the interest of administration … : 1972CriLJ301 . Accused persons were charged for offences under Section 467, 478, 420 read with Section 109 of Indian Penal Code. An application was

Dr. Y. Bhaskar Rao Vs. State of Karnataka, Through Special Investigati ...

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Land Acquisition

under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 praying to quash the prosecution sanction order dated 20.7.2016 vide Annexure-K issued by his Excellency Governor of … be in office. In R.Balakrishna Pillai vs. State of Kerala, (1996)1 SCC 478, the appellant was charged for having entered into criminal conspiracy with the … The court below has not even referred to the earlier order passed on the application under Section 319 CrPC , to justify its action. It is contended that from the sequence of events, it was evident that

Sivandhi Adityan Vs. Additional Registrar of Companies

Court : Chennai

Subject : Company

Acts : Companies Act, 1956 - Sections 2, 2(30), 5, 58A, 58A(1), (4), (5) and (6), 468(2), 477, 478, 539, 543, 545, 621, 625 and 633; Companies (Acceptance of Deposits) Rules, 1975 - Rules 3A and 11

Reported in : [1995]83CompCas616(Mad); 1994CriLJ1149

as against the petitioner-accused No. 4 shall stand quashed. Company - show cause notice - Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Sections 2, 5, 58A, 468, 477, 478, 539, 543, 545, 621, 625 and 633 of Companies Act, … the criminal proceedings initiated against him, invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this court under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'the Code'). 8. Mr. V. Shanmugham, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

Asit Bhattacharjee Vs. Hanuman Prasad Ojha and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 154, 156, 156(1), 156(3), 162, 177, 178, 181, 181(4), 190, 190(1) and 200; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 120B, 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 478 and 481 ;Constitution of India - Articles 136, 142 and 226

Reported in : 104(2007)CLT488(SC); 2007CriLJ3181; (2008)1GLR1(SC); RLW2007(4)SC3074; 2007(7)SCALE241; (2007)5SCC786; AIR 2007 SC 1925

Appellant Company before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kolkata purported to be under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on or about 15.10.2004 inter alia alleging that a criminal conspiracy was entered into by and between … by the Appellant Company before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kolkata purported to be under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on or about 15.10.2004 inter alia alleging that a criminal conspiracy was entered into … have committed offences under Section 120B, 420, 406, 465, 468, 471 , 478 and 481 of the Indian Penal Code.26. Although referred to in the

Surendra Ramchandra Taori Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Criminal

Reported in : 2001ALLMR(Cri)2079; 2002BomCR(Cri)128; (2002)104BOMLR34

bound to protect the fundamental right of its citizen and particularly relating to their liberty, should resort to Section 478 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which vests in the State powers to order functions allocated to Executive … a Police Inspector, by filing istegasha, showing his arrest on 23.10.1999 at 13.15 Hrs. under Section 41(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code vide istegasha No. 44/1999. On his production before the respondent No. 2 without even questioning the petitioner, the … Buldhana on 23.10.1999 in a proceedings initiated under Chapter VIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.2. It is the case of the petitioner that,

Govind Shantaram Walavalkar Vs. Pandharinath Shivaram Rege

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Civil

Acts : Prohibition Act; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973

Reported in : AIR1985Bom224; 1985(1)BomCR571; (1985)87BOMLR1; 1985MhLJ236

enough to observe that the character of the statement made to the police even under the Code of Criminal Procedure, is not the one to which privilege can be extended. The position of the police officer is not … it is enough to observe that the character of the statement made to the police even under the Code of Criminal Procedure, is not the one to which privilege can be extended. The position of the police … found untrue and actuated by ulterior motive--Qualified privilege whether available--Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (II of 1974), Sections 2(d), 2(h), 154.;As against the tort of defamation, … by ulterior motive--Qualified privilege whether available--Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (II of 1974), Sections 2(d), 2(h), 154.;As against the tort of defamation, privilege is a matter … Keshavlal v. Bai Girija, (1899) 1 Bom LR 478, by observing that the same would be determined

Johnson Vs. Sebastian

Court : Kerala

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Limitation Act, 1963 - Schedule - Article 114; ;Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 378, 378(1) to 378(3), 378(4), 378(5), 385 and 478(3); ;High Court Rules, 1971 - Rules 9 and 172

Reported in : 2010(1)KLT498

Judge of this Court held that all Special Leave Petitions filed under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 'must be accompanied by the appeal which is proposed to be filed against the impugned judgment of acquittal. … learned single Judge of this Court held that all Special Leave Petitions filed under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 'must be accompanied by the appeal which is proposed to be filed against the impugned … by the High Court to present a memorandum of appeal under Section 478(3) of the Code. The language employed in Sub-sections (3) and (4) is

Mohammed Ajmal Mohammad Amir Kasab Alias Abu Mujahid and Others Vs. St ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : CriminalConstitution

Acts : Explosive Substance Act, 1908 ; Code of Criminal Procedure(CrPC) 1973 - Section 366, 164(1)(2)(4), 163, 162, 161(2), 304, 315, 226, 229, 313, 39; Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 - Section 16, 15; Explosives Act, 1884 ; Arms Act, 1959.; Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 24, 25, 26, 27, 145, 32(1), 10; Constitution Of India - Article 20(3), 21, 22 (1), 156, 61, 219, 216, 217, 310, 309, 444, 3, 5, 7, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 23, 25, 29, 32, 33, 427, 428, 517,; Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 - Sections 32, 52; Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 - Section 5(1) (2),; Indian Penal Code(IPC) - Sections 161, 165, 120-B,109, 179, 121A, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 176; Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 ; (THE) Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (TADA) Act, 43 of 1993 - Section 32,

Reported in : (2012)9SCC1; JT2012(8)SC4; 2012(4)KCCR271(SN); 2012AIRSCW4942; AIR2012SC3565; 2012(7)SCALE553

offence were comprehensively translated into the statutory scheme framed by Parliament; and that the relevant provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, and the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, were crafted in such a way as to translate the Constitutional … Constitution. It would, therefore, be incorrect to contend that the magistrate recording a confession under Section 164 of CrPC had no obligation to comply with the Miranda rule or the requirements of Sections 32 and 52 of … 436: 16 L Ed 2d 694 (1966)]; Escobedo v. Illinois [378 US 478: 12 L Ed 2d 977 (1964)] the prosecution cannot make use of