Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1993SC1082; 1993CriLJ859; 1992(3)SCALE396; 1993Supp(4)SCC260; [1992]Supp3SCR594
ORDERS. Ratnavel Pandian, J.1. The above appeal is preferred before this Court challenging the judgment of the High Court of Delhi dated 2nd September 1992 rendered in Criminal Writ No. 501/91 knocking down the very registration of the First Information Report and all the proceedings arising thereon including the issue of letters rogatory in the second round of the bout of this litigation.2. The first round of the litigation came before this Court on an appeal preferred by Sh. H.S. Chowdhary challenging the order of the learned Single Judge, Justice M.K. Chawla of the High Court of Delhi dated 19th December, 1990 dismissing his petition on the ground that he has no locus standi to file his petition and a few other appeals preferred by the Union of India and some political parties which had been seriously litigated before this Court on the earlier occasion and resulted in the pronouncement of an order dated 27th August 1991, giving only the conclusions and the final judgment on 28th Aug...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1970SC771; (1969)1SCC161
Shah, J. 1. K. Meerayya, K. Venkatanarayana--respondents in this appeal and two others were charged before the Judicial Magistrate, Second Class, Avanigadda, for offences under Section 323 and 324, I.P. Code, for voluntarily causing injuries to Seetharamayya and Veeraraghavayya on June 22, 1964. The Trial Magistrate convicted Meerayya and Venkatanarayana--the first under the offence under Section 324 and the second for the offence under Section 323, I.P. Code. In appeal to the Court of Session, Krishna Division at Machilipatnam, the order was confirmed. The High Court, in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction, set aside the order of conviction and sentence. The State of Andhra Pradesh had appealed to this court with special leave. 2. The case raises a question of some importance in the administration of justice. The findings recorded by the Trial Magistrate and confirmed by the Sessions Judge were that the respondents had committed assault upon Seetharamayya and Veeraraghavayya and t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1986SC1440; 1986CriLJ1074; 1986(3)Crimes1(SC); 1987(3)KarLJ112; 1986MPLJ438(SC); 1986(1)SCALE1128; (1986)2SCC709; [1986]2SCR771; 1986(1)LC654(SC)
V. Khalid, J.1. This Criminal appeal by special leave, involves the question : Whether a Sub-ordinate Criminal Court has any inherent jurisdiction outside the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code Incidentally, the scope of Article 141 of the Constitution also comes up for consideration. 2. The facts of the case can be stated first. The appellants, two in number, are the accused in a complaint filed by the first respondent in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, New Delhi, disclosing an offence punishable under Section 67 and 72C(l)(a) of the Mines Act, 1952, read with Regulation 106 of the Metallifarous Mines Regulation 1961. The learned Magistrate took the complaint on file and issued summons to the accused to appear on 6.1.1972. On 6,1.1972 neither the complainant nor the accused were present and therefore, the Magistrate passed the following order : Accused not present. None present for the complainant also. The complaint is hereby dismissed in default and for wan...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC1115; [1971]41CompCas474(SC); 1971CriLJ827; (1971)2SCC85; [1971]3SCR859; 1971(III)LC439(SC)
A.N. Ray, J.1. These appeals are by certificate from the judgment dated 13 August, 1968 of the High Court at Calcutta holding that the memorandum of appeals from an order of acquittal were barred by Article 114 of the Limitation Act, 1963.2. The appeals were directed against orders of acquittal passed by the Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta on 4 April, 1968. The four petitions of appeal were presented in the High Court on 1 July, 1968 by the learned Advocate authorised by the Vakalatnama executed by the Assistant Registrar of Companies, West Bengal described as the appellant in all the petitions.3. The Assistant Registrar pf Companies, West Bengal filed petitions of complaint before the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta alleging that the certain officers/directors of the Standard Paint Works (P) Ltd. of 44 Beadon Row, Calcutta mentioned therein were guilty of offence for non-compliance with provisions contained in the Companies Act, 1956 by reason of default in filing Annual Return ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1988)90BOMLR208; JT1988(2)SC280; 1988(1)SCALE909; (1988)3SCC144; [1988]3SCR868
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 305,306 & 307 of 1988.From the Judgment and Order dated 2nd/3rd July, 1986 of the High Court of Bombay in Criminal application No. 1127, 527 and 866 of 1985.S.B. Bhasme, M.C. Bhandare, Dilip Pillai, P.K. Pillai, T. Sridharan and Amit Desai for the appellants. V.M. Tarkunde, R.K. Garg, M.S. Rao, Y.R. Naik, Rajadyaka, S.B. Jaisingha, Ms. R. Jethmalani, C. Ramesh and Ashok Sharma for the Respondents.V.S. Desai, G.B. Sathe, A.M. Khanwilkar and A.S. Bhasme for the State of Maharashtra.The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RANGANATH MISRA, J. Special Leave granted in each of the three cases.A common questions arising for consideration in these appeals is as to the justifiability of the appointment by the State of Special Public Prosecutors and Assistant Public Prosecutors under sections 24 and 25 respectively of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 at the cost of the private complainants.In Criminal Appeal arising out of S.L.P. (Crl) ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1999SC2245; 1999(2)ALD(Cri)1; 1999CriLJ3513; 1999(3)Crimes64(SC); JT1999(3)SC638; 1999(3)SCALE663; (1999)5SCC209; [1999]3SCR594; 1999(2)LC1021(SC)
M.B. Shah, J. 1. Leave granted.2. The question involved in this appeal is whether the High Court has jurisdiction to impose 'exemplary cost of Rs. 10,000' to be paid by each of the appellants while rejecting a frivolous or vexatious petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code for setting aside the charge framed against the appellants?3. FIR was lodged by Josephine Jaya on 29th September, 1989 stating that her in-laws demanded from her father Rs. 60,000 in cash, 65 sovereigns of gold jewellary for the bride and nine sovereigns or similar jewellary for the groom; that out of Rs. 60,000, Rs. 50,000 were paid; that after the marriage, she was treated cruelly and there were unlawful demands for a colour television and Rs. 50,000 in cash. It is also alleged that at the instigation of in-laws accused Nos. 2 to 6, accused No. 1 (her husband) administered certain medicine with a view to abort her pregnancy. After preliminary investigation, on 18th October, 1989, a charge sheet was...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : II(1995)DMC163SC; JT1995(1)SC351; 1994(5)SCALE275; (1995)1SCC627; [1994]Supp6SCR596; 1995(1)LC440(SC)
G.N. Ray, J.1. Leave granted. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court dated October 14, 1993 in Crl. M.P. No. 1572 of 1993. By the aforesaid order, the Andhra Pradesh High Court, in exercise of the power under Section 482 of the CrPC, quashed the proceedings issued in Crl. M.P. No. 1626 of 1993 before the Metropolitan Magistrate, XIth Court, Secunderabad.3. The relevant facts of the case of the appellant are that the appellant was married to one Sri V. Raja Rao under the Special Marriage Act on March 18, 1983 and the appellant and her husband lived together upto November 16,1983. Thereafter, the husband of the appellant went to Saudi Arabia and was working there. He returned in February 1986, but on the ill-advice of the respondents, the husband's attitude towards the appellant changed and the said husband started consuming liquor heavily. The husband of the appellant thereafter went to Dubai and returned to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1960SC128; 1960CriLJ171; [1960]1SCR935
Gajendragadkar, J.1. This appeal by certificate granted by the High Court at Patna, raises ashort question about the construction of Art. 9 in Sch. I of Court Fees Act VIIof 1870 (hereinafter called the Act). A proceeding was instituted against theappellant, Bibhuti Bhusan Chatterjee, under s. 107 of the Code of CriminalProcedure in the Court of the Magistrate of First Class at Bhagalpur; in thisproceeding the learned magistrate directed the appellant to execute a bond ofRs. 5,000 with two sureties of the like amount each to keep the peace for aperiod of one year. The appellant challenged this order by his appeal beforethe Additional Session Judge at Bhagalpur. The appellate judge agreed with thedecision of the learned magistrate and the appeal preferred by the appellantwas dismissed. The appellant then took this matter before the High Court atPatna by his Criminal Revision Application No. 924 of 1957. It appears that thecertified copies of the orders passed by the two courts below in ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2008SC2392; 2008(2)ALD(Cri)381; 2008(2)ALT(Cri)350; 2008CriLJ3065; (2008)3GLR2468(SC); 2008(2)KLT907(SC); RLW2008(2)SC1664; 2008(7)SCALE519; (2008)6SCC789; 2008AIRSCW3962(2008)3SCC(Cri)151; 2008(3)AICLR480; 2008(4)Supreme308; 2008(3)KCCRSN188
S.B. Sinha, J.1. Leave granted.2. Interpretation of Section 4 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 188 of the Code of Criminal Procedure fall for our consideration in this appeal which arises out of a judgment and order dated 12.04.2006 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Criminal Revision Application No. 358 of 2005 dismissing the Criminal Revision filed by the appellant herein.3. Son of the appellant Hanif Ahmed Patel was married to the complainant - respondent on 22.4.2002. Appellant indisputably is a citizen of Mauritius. Her son and daughter-in-law at all material times were residing at Kuwait.A Complaint Petition, however, was filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Navsari by the said respondent alleging physical and mental torture by her husband (the first accused). Allegations primarily against the appellant therein were that the first accused used to consult her and she used to instigate him.As the couple was residing at Kuwait, indisputably the entire cau...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE/ ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.140151 OF2012CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR. APPELLANTS VERSUS MOHD. PARVEZ ABDUL KAYUUM ETC. RESPONDENTS WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 981982 OF2019(Arising out of Special Leave Petition Nos.90289029 of 2016) CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.8394 OF2012CRIMINAL APPEAL No.983 OF2019(Arising out of Special Leave Petition No.5530 of 2017) AND WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO.26 OF2019JUDGMENT ARUN MISHRA, J.1. The facts, in short, envisage that initially two separate cases were registered by local Police relating to the murder of Mr. Haren Pandya, exHome Minister for the State of Gujarat on 26.3.2003 and an attempt on the life of Mr. Jagdish Tiwari, a Viswa Hindu Parishad (VHP) leader of Ahmedabad on 11.3.2003. The case of murder was 2 initially registered on the basis of a complaint brought by Mr. Janak Singh Parmar, vide FIR bearing IC.R. No.272/2003 at Ellisbridge Police Station, Ahmedabad, on ...
Tag this Judgment!