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

K.T.THOMAS, R.P.SETHI, S.N.VARIAVA
Navinchandra N. Majithia – Appellant
Versus
State of Meghalaya – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Thomas, J.—The police inaction to carry on with the investiga­tion in a particular criminal case was attributed to financial crunch of the State and the High Court directed the complainant to supply funds to the police to meet the cost. The party against whom the case was filed felt that such privately funded investi­gation tantamounts to hired investigation which would mar the sanctity of the purpose of statutory investigation and hence he approached this Court for special leave to appeal. Leave granted.

2. Facts which led to the issuance of the aforesaid direction, briefly, are the following : A Mumbai based company claimed ownership of certain land situated at a commercially strategic location in the city of Mumbai. Another company the headquarters of which is at Shillong in Meghalaya, entered into some transac­tion with the Mumbai Company in respect of the said land. Further details of the disputes are not very necessary for this appeal except stating from the stage of commencement of the criminal proceedings. An FIR was lodged by the Shillong company with the Shillong police alleging that the Mumbai Company has cheated Shillong Company to the tune of Rupees nine crore

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