Judgments - Supreme Court of India
HIMANSHU MOHAN RAI Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ANR
COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA Vs. CO-ORDINATION COMMITTEE OF ARTISTS AND TECHNICIANS OF W B FILM AND TELEVISION AN
UTTAR PRADESH STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD AND ORS Vs. ARUN KUMAR MISHRA AND ORS
NATIONAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORY LTD. Vs. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS ETC ETC Vs. HEMANT RAI ETC ETC
BHOGIREDDI VARALAKSHMI & ORS Vs. MANI MUTHUPANDI AND ORS
SASI (D) THR LRS Vs. ARAVINDAKSHAN NAIR AND ORS
M.G. ESHWARAPPA & ORS. Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA
JSW INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED AND ANR. Vs. KAKINADA SEAPORTS LIMITED AND ORS.
THE MANAGEMENT OF STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. SMITA SHARAD DESHMUKH & ANR.
It is a well-settled principle that the High Court will not re-appreciate the evidence but will only see whether there is evidence in support of the impugned conclusion. The court has to take the evidence as it stands and its only limited jurisdiction is Full Judgment
DNYANDEO SABAJI NAIK AND ANR. Vs. PRADNYA PRAKASH KHADEKAR AND ORS.
M/S RASIKLAL KANTILAL & CO. Vs. BOARD OF TRUSTEE OF PORT OF BOMBAY & ORS
MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, NANGAL AND ORS. Vs. ARUNA SAINI
RAVADA SASIKALA Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ANR
C.B.I Vs. SADHU RAM SINGLA & ORS.
The question which arises before us is no longer res integra i.e. whether FIR and the consequential proceedings alleging non-compoundable offences could be quashed by the High Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. on the basis of the settlement arrived at between the complainant and the respondents-accused. In concluding hereinabove, we are not unmindful of the view recorded in Full Judgment