Filter by Date
Allahabad High Court (Single Judge)

Kaptan Singh And 5 Others Vs. State Of U.P. & Another

APPLICATION U/s 482, 13977 of 2015, Judgment Date: May 21, 2015

From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 CR.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court Full Judgment

Allahabad High Court (Single Judge)

M/S Hcl Infosystem Ltd. Vs. C.B.I.

APPLICATION U/s 482, 6623 of 2015, Judgment Date: May 01, 2015

Full Judgment

Allahabad High Court (Single Judge)

Prashant @ Sheelu Dixit Vs State Of U.P. & Another

APPLICATION U/s 482, 9953 of 2015, Judgment Date: Apr 21, 2015

Full Judgment

Allahabad High Court (Single Judge)

Hari Dutt Tiwari Vs State Of U.P. & Another

APPLICATION U/s 482, 7588 of 2015, Judgment Date: Mar 30, 2015

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

STATE OF M.P. Vs. RAKESH MISHRA WITH State of Madhya Pradesh Versus Gyanendra Singh Jadon

Appeal (Crl.), 498 with 499 of 2015, Judgment Date: Mar 23, 2015

Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. By the impugned judgment the High Court of Madhya Pradesh has allowed the three revision petitions, setting aside the orders of the First Additional Judge/ Special Judge, Indore, for framing charges against three accused persons, However, it would suffice to say that the law on this point is crystal clear that only charge-sheet along with the accompanying material is Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

HMT WATCHES LTD. Vs. M.A. ABIDA & ANR

Appeal (Crl.), 471 of 2015, Judgment Date: Mar 19, 2015

Whether the cheques were given as security or not, or whether there was outstanding liability or not is a question of fact which could have been determined only by the trial court after recording evidence of the parties. In our opinion, the High Court should not have Full Judgment

Allahabad High Court (Single Judge)

Shokeen Vs State Of U.P.

APPLICATION U/s 482, 5836 of 2015, Judgment Date: Mar 19, 2015

Full Judgment

Allahabad High Court (Single Judge)

Ramesh Handa Vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others

APPLICATION U/s 482, 5613 of 2015, Judgment Date: Feb 25, 2015

Full Judgment

Allahabad High Court (Single Judge)

Man Chand @ Manik Chand Vs State Of U.P. & Another

APPLICATION U/s 482, 5352 of 2015, Judgment Date: Feb 24, 2015

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

RAVI PRAKASH SINGH @ ARVIND SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

Appeal (Crl.), 325 of 2015, Judgment Date: Feb 20, 2015

In State of M.P. v. Rustam and others[5], this Court has laid down the law that while computing period of ninety days, the day on which the accused was remanded to the judicial custody should be excluded, and the day on which challan is filed in the court, should be included. That being Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India ()

Sonu Gupta Versus Deepak Gupta & Ors.

Appeal (Crl.), 285-287 of 2015, Judgment Date: Feb 11, 2015

-At the stage of cognizance and summoning the Magistrate is required to apply his judicial mind only with a view to take cognizance of the offence, or, in other words, to find out whether prima facie case has been made out for summoning the accused persons. At this stage, the learned Magistrate is not required to consider the defence version or materials or Full Judgment

Chhatisgarh High Court (Single Judge)

Rajkumar Sharma Vs Shriram Finance Co. Ltd

CRMP->CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION, 128 of 2014, Judgment Date: Aug 07, 2014

Full Judgment

Chhatisgarh High Court (Single Judge)

Victor Minj & Another Vs State of Chhattisgarh

CRMP->CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION, 560 of 2014, Judgment Date: Jul 22, 2014

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

J.L SOMAN & ORS VERSUS STATE OF BIHAR & ANR

Appeal (Crl.), 2114,2115,2116 of 2013, Judgment Date: Dec 17, 2013

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Full Bench (FB)- Three Judge)

Jitendra Raghuvanshi & Ors vs Babita Raghuvanshi & Anr

Appeal (Crl.), 447 of 2013, Judgment Date: Mar 15, 2013

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Udai Shankar Awasthi Vs State of U.P. & Anr.

Appeal (Crl.), 61 of 2013, Judgment Date: Jan 09, 2013

CONTINUING OFFENCE: 10. Section 472 Cr.P.C. provides that in case of a continuing offence, a fresh period of limitation begins to run at every moment of the time period during which the offence continues. The expression, ‘continuing offence’ has not been defined in the Cr.P.C. because Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Paramjeet batra Vs State of Uttarakhand & ors.

Appeal (Crl.), 2069 of 2012, Judgment Date: Dec 14, 2012

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Y.K. Singla Vs. Punjab National Bank & Ors.

Appeal (Civil), 9087 of 2012, Judgment Date: Dec 14, 2012

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

SURAT SINGH VS. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL (NOW UTTARAKHAND) RESPONDENTS & ANR.

Appeal (Crl.), 2022 of 2012, Judgment Date: Dec 10, 2012

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

State of Punjab Versus Davinder Pal Singh Bhullar & Ors. etc.

Appeal (Crl.), 753-755 of 2009, Judgment Date: Dec 07, 2011

Full Judgment