Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH
M.NAGAPRASANNA
Mspl Limited. – Appellant
Versus
Central Bureau Of Investigation – Respondent
ORDER :
M.NAGAPRASANNA, J.
The petitioners, in all these cases, call in question proceedings in C.C.Nos.59, 61, 63, 78, 97 and 99 of 2022, pending before the Civil Judge and JMFC, Ankola, Uttara Kannada arising out of FIR registered for offences punishable under Sections 120B r/w Sections 379 , 411, 420 and 447 of the IPC and Sections 4(1), 4(1A) r/w 21(5) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (‘MMDR Act’ for short). The petitioners are either individual Directors or the Company, M/s MSPL Limited (hereinafter referred to as the ‘the Company’ for short). Since facts leading to registration of crime and the crime leading to charge sheet all the C.C. numbers are common in all these cases, they are taken up together and considered by this common order.
2. Facts, in brief, germane are as follows; -
2.1. On 03-11-2009 accused No.1/Company enters into an agreement with M/s Amalagiris, accused No.8 in respect of procurement of iron ore. The transaction goes on in terms of the said agreement. Certain developments take place where all the mining activities come under the supervision of the Apex Court in the case of SAMAJ PARIVARTANA SAMUDAYA AND OTHERS v. STATE OF KARN
The court ruled that the CBI lacked jurisdiction to proceed against the petitioners due to insufficient evidence linking them to the alleged crimes as transporters, not exporters.
The provisions of Section 22 of the MMDR Act do not operate as a complete and absolute bar for taking action by the police for illegal and dishonestly committing theft of minerals, and the police hav....
Section 239 of Cr.P.C. which postulates “when accused shall be discharged -If, upon considering the police report and the documents sent with it under Section 173 and making such examination, if any,....
The principle of vicarious liability cannot be automatically imputed to directors or partners of a company without specific averments and proof of their involvement in the alleged offences.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the 'Doctrine of Attribution' and the principle of vicarious liability in determining the liability of individuals in a company ....
Interpretation of vaioud relevant provisions of Code under Chapter XIV and of principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to exercise of extraordinary power under Art....
In order to constitute an offence of criminal conspiracy and to attract its rigor, two factors must spring forth from the facts of the case:(i) involvement of more than one person and (ii) an agreeme....
Scrap dealer not liable under Sections 411/120-B IPC for purchasing scrap from attached premises pursuant to custodian permission and cheque payment, absent knowledge of theft or conspiracy; FIR quas....
FIRs against a mineral concessionaire were quashed due to lack of verification and failure to establish cognizable offences, emphasizing the need for proper legal procedures in prosecution.
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
