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

1984 Supreme(Bom) 189

V.S.KOTWAL
Hasmukh Balubhai Shah – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra & others – Respondent


JUDGMENT - V.S. KOTWAL, J.:---The whole foundation of ventilating the grievance by the petitioner claiming privilege for not being examined as prosecution witness in a criminal case is obviously misconceived having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case. The learned Magistrate while negativing the said contention has assigned cogent reasons on application of mind. All the facts considered in proper perspective make it clear that there is no reason whatsoever to upset the impugned order in this proceeding initiated under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and under the inherent powers under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as also the revisional jurisdiction under section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

2. On the basis of a report by the Investigating Officer, the Company Law Board, Bombay a formal complaint came to be lodged by the Regional Director, Company Law Board, Bombay, one Shri Rajagopalan, in September 1972 under section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure wherein four persons were arrayed as accused persons. On that basis offence under sections 120-B, 402 and 477-B of the Indian Penal Code and section 7 of the Essential Commodities A






















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