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

1989 Supreme(Kar) 342

K.RAMACHANDRIAH
MRUTHYUNJAYA – Appellant
Versus
PREMAJIT SINGH – Respondent


Advocates:
B.V.ACHARYA RAO, I.T.Rai, N.Samba Murthy, VINODH P.WASHI

RAMACHANDRAIUH, J.

( 1 ) THIS Criminal Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'the Code') involves for consideration the following point of law:"whether a complainant whose Revision petition filed under Section 397 of the code before the Sessions Court against the order of the Magistrate dismissing his complaint is also dismissed by the sessions Judge cannot invoke the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court under section 482 of the Code for setting aside the orders of the Magistrate and the sessions Judge?"

( 2 ) THE said point arises in this way: (a) Petitioner as proprietor of M/s. Raja silk House (Pvt.) Ltd. , Basavaraja Market, bangalore, filed a private complaint against the respondents in the Court of the Chief metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore City, under Section 190 read with Section 200 of the Code alleging that the respondents had committed offences punishable under Sections 477-A, 420 and 409 IPC. Respondents- 1 and 2 are the Chairman and General manager of the Bank of Baroda at Bombay and respondents 3 to 5 are the Senior manager, Accounts officer and another senior Manager of the Bank of Baroda branch, K. G. Road, Bangalore


















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