Leave granted against
acquittal of one accused in cheque bounce case; rejected against others due to
insufficient material.
Writ petition dismissed
as investigation revealed accused gave two different names for bank loan and
documents confirmed involvement.
Petition dismissed as
detainee was lawfully detained and produced within stipulated time without
violation of fundamental rights.
Conviction reversed due
to unreliable DNA evidence and prosecutrix not supporting prosecution case.
Bail denied as victim
identified applicant in TIP and medical evidence corroborated allegations.
Permitted as reference
to conversation in FIR was crucial and could not be ignored merely because it
was not part of chargesheet.
Conviction of
co-accused set aside as no evidence showed they forged or aided forgery;
allegations showed at most negligence, not criminal intent.
Managers direction led
to unsafe act by worker; IPC prosecution valid even after action under
Factories Act.
Discharge
denied in fraud case under MPID Act as material on record raised strong
suspicion and appellant sought to evade trial.
Protection under the
Act not available to husband as the Act is meant for aggrieved women and no perversity
found in Family Courts finding.
Orders from 1999 were deemed arbitrary and quashed and State Government was instructed to consider Societys genuine difficulties and any penalty imposed.
Discharge granted as
departmental inquiry exonerated accused on merits and trial continuation deemed
unnecessary.
Appellants conduct, including humiliation, refusal to have a physical relationship, and allegations of extra-marital relations, is considered 'cruelty' against Respondent, leading to a divorce decree.
Employer can dispense services to convicted employees, but must apply mind to circumstances leading to conviction, especially when it is not for grave offenses and punishment should be after evolution of conduct and impact on administration.
Cognizance under P.C. Act
taken without sanction is invalid; discharge allowed.
Petitioner, who has a commendable academic record, secured admission to management course on merit, maintained good attendance and submitted assignments timely hence, Respondent No. 2 directed to permit Petitioners to appear for re-examination to be conducted for student.
High Courts refusal to
interfere upheld as respondent remained public servant during deputation and
sanction under Section 197 CrPC was necessary for prosecution under IPC and PC
Act.
Allowed under Sections
217, 218 IPC r/w Section 34 as prosecution was barred by limitation under
Section 468 CrPC and no sanction under Section 197 CrPC was obtained despite
petitioners being public servants acting in official capacity.
Allowed as forged
document allegedly authored by applicant was not used for benefit and no link
established between applicant and forgery.
Rejection upheld as
evidence collected during investigation disclosed prima facie case and sufficed
for trial under Section 376(2)(n) IPC.
Tap the button below to open the PDF in your device's default viewer