Judgments - Quashing of Criminal Proceedings
HASMUKHLAL D. VORA & ANR. VERSUS THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU
R. NAGENDER YADAV VERSUS THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND ANR.
Anil Bansal Versus The State Of Madhya Pradesh
Anil Kumar Lohadiya Versus Ramlal Gupta (Deceased)
P. DHARAMARAJ VERSUS SHANMUGAM & ORS.
MUNNA PRASAD VERMA VERSUS STATE OF U.P. & ANR.
SUNITA PALITA & OTHERS Versus M/S PANCHAMI STONE QUARRY
Mahesh Singh Jadon Versus Shri Radha Sharan Dubey
State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. Versus Akhil Sharda & Ors.
Satish Kumar Jatav Versus The State of U.P. & Ors.
J.Sekar @Sekar Reddy Versus Directorate of Enforcement
BABU VENKATESH AND OTHERS VERSUS STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER
Smt. Rekha Jain and Anr. Versus The State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors.
J.B.S. Chandel Vs. State of M.P.
Law laid down - The object of giving protection under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure-- To take sanction for initiating prosecution against public servant for protecting them from needless harassment so as to render protective assurance to honest officer to perform public duty honestly and to best of their abilities because threat of prosecution demoralises the honest officer. Real test to determine applicability of Section 197 of Cr.C.P. and obtaining sanction from the Government are:- (i) That the accused must be a Full Judgment
STATE OF ODISHA Versus PRATIMA MOHANTY ETC.
M/s. NAG LEATHERS PVT. LTD. VERSUS M/s. DYNAMIC MARKETING PARTNERSHIP, REP. BY ITS PARTNERS & ANOTHER
Ved Prakash Sharma Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh & ors
Law laid down - Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accordance with the guidelines engrafted in such power namely; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. In those cases power to quash the criminal proceedings or complaint or F.I.R may be exercised where the offender and victim have settled their dispute would depend on the facts and circumstances of Full Judgment