Bank Can Adjust OTS Deposit on Borrower Default, No Cheating u/s 420 IPC: Delhi High Court
02 Mar 2026
Divij Kumar Quits CMS INDUSLAW for Independent Practice
03 Mar 2026
Global Lawyers Debate AI Liability in Autonomous Vehicles
03 Mar 2026
CCPA Fines Startup ₹8 Lakh for False Child Growth Claims
05 Mar 2026
Madras High Court Scoffs at Police Custody Injury Claim
05 Mar 2026
India's Criminal Investigations Face Systemic Conviction Crisis
05 Mar 2026
Kerala HC Slams TDB Financial Discipline in Ayyappa Conclave, Orders Auditor Report on Past Anomalies: High Court of Kerala
06 Mar 2026
ST Members Can Invoke Section 13B HMA If Hinduised By Customs: Chhattisgarh High Court
06 Mar 2026
Lease Cancellation Valid Even by 'In-Charge' Mining Officer Under OMMC Rules: Orissa High Court
06 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
ABHAY S. OKA, UJJAL BHUYAN
State through Inspector of Police CBI, Chennai – Appellant
Versus
Naresh Prasad Agarwal – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
JUDGMENT :
ABHAY S. OKA, J.
1. Delay condoned.
2. Leave granted.
3. Heard the learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents.
4. The learned Single Judge of the Madras High Court decided two proceedings by the impugned judgment. The first was a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing the charge sheet in CC No. 3 of 2014 pending on the file of the learned Special Judge, CBI cases, Chennai. The second was a Criminal Revision Application challenging the order dated 4th August, 2015 by which an application for discharge made by the respondents in the same case was rejected by the impugned judgment. The learned Judge quashed the charge sheet, insofar as the first respondent is concerned and by setting aside the order dated 4th August, 2015, an order of discharge was passed as regards another accused.
Retaining file of a case for a period of 5 months after demitting office is an act of gross impropriety on part of Judge – Supreme Court cannot support such acts of impropriety.
Judicial decisions must be timely and reasoned to maintain the integrity of the judiciary and ensure that justice is not only done but seen to be done.
The court established that the burden of proof lies on the petitioner to demonstrate sufficient grounds for condoning delay in filing a revision application, and that mere awareness of a judgment doe....
(1) A Judicial Officer cannot pronounce concluding portion of his judgment in open court without entire text of judgment being prepared/dictated.
(2) Requirement of a second show cause notice rela....
If a judgment is not pronounced within a period of six months, it should be placed before another Bench for fresh arguments – There is no question of pronouncement of judgment now by same Bench.
The court clarified that a dismissal for default does not amount to a final order, allowing recall and reinstatement for hearings on merits under inherent powers of the High Court.
Procedural safeguards in remission applications must be strictly followed, and reliance on insufficiently reasoned opinions can render decisions unsustainable.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appellate court is obligated to hear the appellant or their counsel and go through the records before disposing of the appeal, as per the ....
Limitation – It is not length of delay that would be required to be considered while examining plea for condonation of delay, it is cause for delay which has been propounded will have to be examined ....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
Listen Article