Judgments - PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, 1988
VED PRAKASH VERSUS DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Lal Sahab Bairagi V/s. State of Madhya Pradesh
म.प्र. उच्च न्यायालय जबलपुर की 5 जज बेंच ने यह अभिनिर्धारित किया है कि किसी सेवानिवृत्त शासकीय सेवक को क्रिमिनल न्यायालय द्वारा दोषी ठहराए जाने एवं सजा दिए जाने के उपरांत मध्यप्रदेश सिविल सेवा पेंशन नियम 1976 के नियम 8(2)के अनुसार पेंशन रोकने अथवा वापस लिए जाने के निर्णय के पूर्व लोक सेवक को यद्यपि सुनवाई का अवसर दिए जाने का प्रावधान नहीं है किंतु पेंशन को रोकने अथवा वापस लिए जाने के पूर्व सक्षम प्राधिकारी द्वारा अपने स्तर पर क्रिमिनल Full Judgment
Javed Mirza Vs State of Madhya Pradesh
Ku. Shahida Sultan Vs State of Madhya Pradesh
STATE REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION VERSUS M. SUBRAHMANYAM
Suresh Kumar S/o Kishanlal Jain Versus State of Madhya Pradesh
State Represented by the Deputy Superintendent of Police Vigilance and Anti Corruption Tamil Nadu VERSUS J. Doraiswamy Etc
Kailash S/o Late Mathuralal Sangate & others vs. State of Madhya Pradesh through SPE, Lokayukt, Ujjain
MRS. NEERAJ DUTTA VERSUS STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)
SHIV SHANKAR PRASAD SINGH VERSUS THE STATE OF BIHAR
C.B.I. New Delhi VERSUS B.B. Agarwal & Ors. etc.
Suresh Singh Bhadoria Versus Central Bureau of Investigtion
Law laid down - In terms of Section 170(1) of CrPC, the investigating agency is mandated to produce an accused into custody for the non-bailable offence. The argument that the Court should have issued summons in respect of such offence, cannot be accepted. Inherent power of judicial review under Section 482 of CrPC presupposes that the Court is required to see whether the trial Court has abused the process of law or it is necessary to annul the proceedings for securing the Full Judgment