Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
No specific allegation was made that the petitioners, who were not members of a scheduled caste or scheduled tribe, had intentionally undertaken an act to insult, intimidate or humiliate the first informant, who is a member of the scheduled caste.
Presence of aggressive stray dogs on streets are causing grave risk to the lives of children, elderly people and vulnerable sections of society and also unabling them to access streets and parks because of the fear of being attacked and bitten by the rabies infected stray dogs.
The Court stated that considering that Chandrashekhar is a sitting MLA and the alleged offences were allegedly committed by his party workers, the argument that there might be a larger conspiracy could not be ruled out.
When the lawyer failed in allegedly threatening the police officers, he drove away from the spot against their instructions.
“In a proceeding under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, this Court is not required to conduct a mini trial or get into nitty-gritties of the evidence.”
Violence erupted when a Maulana allegedly called upon members of a particular community to assemble at the Islamiya Inter College, and the crowd went awry.
As per the settlement, the husband agreed to deposit a total sum of Rs. 30,00,000. However, the husband merely deposited cheques of certain amounts, which had not been released to the wife, due to husband’s failure to appear in Family Court, resulting in dismissal of divorce petition.
“Even if the allegations of the complainant are taken at the highest, considering the complainants conviction in a case arising out of same incident, the same can at best be considered as a self-defense or an altercation at the stage when the complainant has formed an unlawful assemble and caused injuries to the petitioner and another person when they were carrying out certain functions assigned to them.”
“A relationship born of mutual volition, even if it founders in disappointment, cannot, save in clearest of cases, be transmuted into an offence under the criminal law.”
In the present case, the High Court could have examined the petitioner’s grievance, since it is evident from the petition, that the petitioner sought to invoke the twin jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution and Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to quash the FIR.
“There has to be paradigm shift in societal mindset by attaching stigma to the accused and not to the girl who underwent the horrid suffering by way of rape.”
“Not quashing the criminal proceedings would rather rekindle hostility, whereas quashing the same would promote cordiality and bonhomie between the neighbours.”
“Reading of the complaint, filed in the present case, would go to show that, necessary ingredients to attract the alleged offence is not found.”
“In a democracy, of the people, by the people, and for the people, peaceful protest is a constitutional right. Simply because an individual took to the streets to protest in order to safeguard their rights when their interests were affected does not imply that they have committed offences.”
“From the harmonious reading of the provisions of PC & PNDT Act, which make the offences as cognizable and non-bailable along with the provisions of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, it cannot be said that no FIR can be registered or that the registration of FIR is barred under PC & PNDT Act.”
When exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of CrPC, the Court will not ordinarily embark upon an inquiry whether the evidence in question is reliable or whether on a reasonable appreciation of it the accusations will not be sustained, as that is the function of the Trial Court.
“By allowing legal heirs to settle such cases unilaterally, the justice system would fail in its duty to hold perpetrators accountable, since the crime does not affect only the family but has wider ramifications for society at large.”
“The incomplete and hazy facts coming from the record indicates that further investigation is required in the matter.”
“If a person sells a property knowing that it does not belong to him, and thereby defrauds the person who purchased the property, the person defrauded, that is, the purchaser, may complain that the vendor committed the fraudulent act of cheating. But a third party who is not the purchaser under the deed may not be able to make such complaint.”
“It is relevant to note that the FIR need not disclose any specific offence. The FIR should indicate that prima facie an allegation of commission of an offence exists and such an allegation requires an investigation.”