Judgments
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Versus M. SIVAMANI
While the bar against cognizance of a specified offence is mandatory, the same has to be understood in the context of the purpose for which such a bar is created. The bar is not intended to take away remedy against a crime but only to protect an innocent person against false or frivolous proceedings by a private person. The expression “the public servant or his administrative superior” cannot exclude the High Court. It is clearly implicit in the direction of Full Judgment
GLOCAL MEDICAL COLLEGE AND SUPER SPECIALITY HOSPITAL & RESEARCH CENTRE VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER
Surendra Nath Yadav Vs. Debt Recovery Officer, And 3 Others
R.MADHUSUDHAN VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR.
TRENT LIMITED Vs NANASAHEB GOVINDRAO AHER AND 2 ORS.
H. FILLUNGER & COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED AND ORS Vs AJIT ARVIND MARATHE
MANIK BAPURAO SHEJAL (IN JAIL) Vs DY. INSPECTOR GENERAL (PRISONS) EAST DIVISION NAGPUR AND ANOTHER
SAU.SUMAN W/O VASANTRAO MOGRE Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA,THR.PSO.P.STN.ASHTI
DINESH S/O PREMLAL GAUTAM Vs THE STATE OF MAH.THR.PSO.P.STN.DAWANIWADA
UMESH GIRISH ARVIND PUJARI Vs REGISTERING AUTHORITY JALGAON CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION JALGAON AND ANOTHER
BHAURAO CHAVAN SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD THROUGH ITS SECRETARY G B SBANIS Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
ABDUL RAUF ABDUL RAZZAK Vs ABDUL QAYYUM ABDUL WAHED SAB AND ORS
Ganesh Prasad Garg Vs. General Manager, South East Coal Limited & others
In the present case, as already discussed by this Court that the authority which has issued the charge sheet has already been vested with the power to issue the charge sheet, nothing survives for this Court on the question of framing of charges as it is for the competent authority only to decide the case on merits in accordance with law. Full Judgment