Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
Petitioner stated that he had not filed any such or similar petition for quashing before the present Court or the Supreme Court. However, the Court noted that the petitioner had earlier filed the present petition on 01-04-2024 and the present petition was filed on 17-05-2024.
Madhya Pradesh High Court deliberated on whether morality could supersede legal provisions and questioned if leading a modern lifestyle could be deemed immoral.
“The fact that the Trial Court had not issued the summons under all the Sections mentioned in the complaint and had given the reasons, negate the plea of the petitioners that the Trial Court had not applied its mind while issuing the summons.”
“There is no proof that the CCTV Camera is directed towards the house of Respondent 2, and it is merely a suspicion. Further, there is no proof that the petitioners/accused had contacted Respondent 2 to foster a personal relationship.”
“Though justice has got to be administered in accordance with the law enacted by the Legislature. The concept of justice is elastic and is imperceptible. There can be no hard and fast line constricting the power of the High Courts to do substantial justice.”
Madhya Pradesh High Court: Rajeev Kumar Dubey, J., upheld the decision of the Trial Court and rejected a petition filed under Section