Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ASHWIN D.BHOBE
Parmanand Dashrath Nikumbh – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
1. Heard Mr. Shobhit Shukla, learned Advocate for the Petitioner and Ms. Pallavi Dabholkar, learned APP for Respondent No. 1-State.
2. Mr. Shobhit Shukla, learned Advocate for the Petitioner, states that Respondent No.2 was the Complainant. He submits that the Respondent passed away on 1st February 2022. He submits that, upon his demise, no rights would devolve to his legal representatives therefore, he submits that there is no need to substitute any legal representative of Respondent No.2. He seeks leave to delete Respondent No.2. He mentions that during the lifetime of Respondent No.2, he had filed an Application before the Sessions Court in Miscellaneous Complaint No.112 of 2006, requesting the withdrawal of the complaint. He submits that the Sessions Court, by a detailed order dated 14th September 2007, permitted the withdrawal and consequently dismissed the Miscellaneous Complaint No. 112 of 2006. Mr. Shobhit Shukla, learned Advocate, therefore states that this Petition can be heard without substituting Respondent No.2. At the Petitioner's risk, leave is granted to delete Respondent No. 2. Mr. Shobhit Shukla states that the amendment will be carried
Prior sanction under Section 197 CrPC and Section 19 PC Act mandatory before directing investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC or registering FIR against public servant for offences in discharge of o....
Prior sanction under Section 197 CrPC and Section 19 PC Act mandatory before directing investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC or registering FIR against public servant for official duty acts; absenc....
Point of Law : High Court was absolutely right in setting aside the order of the Special Judge. Unlike Section 19 of the PC Act, the protection under Section 197 CrPC is available to the public serva....
Cognizance of offences against public servants requires prior government sanction under Sections 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and 197 of the Cr.P.C., even if the acts are alleged to be done....
The requirement of prior sanction for prosecution under Sec.19 PC Act applies at the time of taking cognizance of the offence, and the intent behind the provision is to protect public servants from m....
The necessity of prior sanction under Section 197 Cr.P.C. is affirmed for public servants when their alleged offences are connected to the discharge of their official duties.
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
