SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1999 Supreme(SC) 1538

S.N.PHUKAN, G.T.NANAVATI
Keshab Narayan Banerjee – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


JUDGMENT

G.T. Nanavati, J.-The question which arises in this appeal is whether Compensation Officer appointed under the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950 is a Court within the meaning of Section 195(1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The High Court held that Compensation Officer is not a Court and dismissal Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 4073 of 1986, filed by the appellants, for quashing the proceedings pending against them in the Court of Special Judge (Vigilance), Patna.

2. The appellants are facing trial in the Court of Special Judge (Vigilance) Patna wherein it is alleged that in pursuance of a conspiracy entered into by them, payment of Rs. 2 crore by way of compensation was fraudulently obtained by them and thus they have committed offences punishable under Sections 120B, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 477 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 5(2) read with sub-section (1)(c) and (d) of Section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. The appellants raised a preliminary objection before the learned Special Judge that the aforesaid offences are alleged to have been committed by the appellants in respect of a document produced in the compensation proceedings b













Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top