The Finance Section of Pondichery University had found that from 2008 to 2016 a Professor had misappropriated the funds financed by the Government of India using fake and forged bills causing a wrongful loss to the Government of India to the tune of Rs.2.25 Crores.
“Offences of forging documents for transferring ownership of land worth crores are grave in nature. Hence, while it is extremely important to protect the personal liberty of a person, it is equally incumbent to analyse the seriousness of the offence and determine if there is a need for custodial interrogation.”
In the instant matter of forgery for the purpose of cheating, the Kerala High Court had earlier granted interim protection from arrest.
The Court opined that the mere potential or presence of criminal proceedings deriving from the same circumstances would not exclude the issue from being resolved through arbitration.
The Supreme Court’s decision shall not affect the pending proceedings before the High Court of Delhi against the order of the ECI as the Court did not express anything on the Constitution of the Shiromani Akali Dal
Allahabad High Court said that the convicts are not in a position to say that they were prejudiced in any manner by common FIR, one charge sheet and same charge for all three convicts and one trial.
In a case pertaining to Criminal breach of trust, cheating, forgery, and falsification of accounts, the Saket District Court acquits the accused, as the prosecution failed to establish the ingredients of the offences beyond reasonable doubt.
“The scenario is that any order or judgment passed by this Court becomes a reportable exercise to create more volumes of reported cases! This thus has a possibility at times of causing some confusion on the legal principles prevalent.”
Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Thane: Noting the fact that a man suppressed the material fact of his private life before marriage
Supreme Court: The Division Bench of Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.M. Sundresh, JJ., held that a generally worded clause of a contract
Central Bureau of Investigation, Ghaziabad (CBI)-Shivank Singh, Special Judicial Magistrate (CBI) while taking cognizance under Sections 420, 467, 468 & 471 IPC,
Delhi High Court: Yogesh Khanna, J., remarked that, Once the Parliament steps in and cures the defect pointed out by a Constitutional
Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI): The Court of Shivank Singh, Special Judicial Magistrate (CBI) while convicting the accused of the offences under
Madras High Court: N. Anand Venkatesh, J., while addressing a matter expressed that: “…a transaction hit by lis pendens would not result
Delhi High Court: Subramonium Prasad, J., with regard to the settlement of disputes stated that: “In crimes which seriously endangers the well
Patna High Court: Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J., rejected the bail application of the applicant-accused in connection with the FIR registered for offence punishable
Uttaranchal High Court: Lok Pal Singh, J., addressed an application that sought to quash criminal proceedings under Sections 420, 468, 471 of
Kerala High Court: R. Narayana Pisharadi, J. allowed a petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter ‘CrPC’)
Uttaranchal High Court: R. C. Khulbe, J. refused to grant a bail where the applicant was charged under Sections 420, 467, 468
Delhi High Court: The Bench of Mukta Gupta, J. dismissed a petition filed against the judgment of Metropolitan Magistrate acquitting the respondent for