Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
Madhya Pradesh High Court deliberated on whether morality could supersede legal provisions and questioned if leading a modern lifestyle could be deemed immoral.
The instant matter highlights the delicate balance between security measures and citizens’ rights, emphasizing the importance of lawful and justified actions by authorities in maintaining public order.
Calcutta High Court deemed the criminal proceedings an abuse of the process of law and allowed the revisional application.
Calcutta High Court observed that there exists lack of correlation between evidence and charges, failure to address the petitioner’s defense, and overlooking crucial factors.
The Calcutta High Court stated that Mens rea, a crucial element for a criminal offense, was not established merely by the omission of the license number.
If the complaint’s allegations and the evidence collected do not disclose the commission of any offense, and if they fail to make a case against the accused, the Court can quash the alleged complaint to secure the ends of justice.
While allowing the revisional application, Calcutta High Court quashed the impugned proceeding on the ground of lack of substantial evidence to prima facie substantiate the offenses against the wife.
Calcutta High Court held that there is no substantial evidence against the petitioner, and hence, allowing the case to proceed would be an abuse of the legal process.
Calcutta High Court held that the Court has no power to determine the correctness, validity and probative value of the evidence collected by the Investigation Officer during investigation.
The Court quashed the proceedings on the ground that the district wherein the school was situated, does not come under the ambit of Karnataka Open Places (Prevention of Disfigurement) Act, 1981.
While quashing the criminal proceeding filed against petitioners, the Calcutta High Court held that the same is lacking with substantial evidence and is institutes with malicious intent.
Calcutta High Court held that a necessary element of “intent to cause disorder or incite violence” under Section 153-A of the IPC, was not established in the case dairy
Calcutta High Court dismissed all the three criminal revision applications seeking quashing of the criminal proceedings and deemed them groundless.
Calcutta High Court quashed the criminal proceeding pending before the Judicial Magistrate and all related orders.
The Court stated that any interference under S. 482 of CrPC would be rendering approval of the accused-advocate’s depravity and will have a chilling effect on legal profession. Thus, the accused-advocate must come clean in a full-blown trial.
It was stated that decision of the co-ordinate Bench of the High Court in Naresh Gundyal v. State on same issue, defeats the very object of S. 498-A, IPC and Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
The Court was hearing a case where a wife had lodged a complaint alleging cruelty by her husband and in-laws, after a divorce petition had already been filed by the husband.
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that vicarious liability of a company’s directors can be imputed as per the statutory provisions in cases where a company is an offender.
While quashing the impugned criminal proceeding against the petitioners, the Court held that a defaulter borrower holds the secured asset only in trust or symbolic possession and even if the petitioners have entered the said property, the same cannot be marked out as trespassers in other’s’ property.
“The High Court, while forming an opinion whether a criminal proceeding or complaint or FIR should be quashed in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC, must evaluate whether the ends of justice would justify the exercise of the inherent power”