RAI CHATTOPADHYAY
N. P. Mathi Lingan – Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Rai Chattopadhyay, J.—The petitioner is the accused person in criminal proceeding No. CS 0025782 of 2015, filed before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kolkata which is now pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate 14th Court at Kolkata. The petitioner by filing the instant case under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, has sought for quashing of the said criminal proceeding being No. CS 0025782 of 2015 and all orders of the Magistrate passed in connection with the said case.
2. The authorized representative of the opposite party no. 2/complaint company has filed the complaint before the Magistrate on May 21, 2015. The petitioner is the accused person No. 7 and Company Secretary of the complainant company and said to have been looking after the day to day business affairs of the company. He is said to have been in control and management thereof. After careful perusal of the written complaint lodged by the opposite party No. 2 before the Magistrate it appears that a hypothecation loan agreement was entered into between the complainant company and the accused No. 1 company, of which the accused No. 7 that is the present petitioner has been employed as a Co
Vijay Dhanuka vs. Najima Mumtaj
Abhjijit Pawar vs. Hemanth Madhukar Nimbalkar and Anr (2017) 2 SCC 528. (Para 15) – Relied.
Smt Nagawwa vs. Veeranna Shivalingappa Konjalgi and Others AIR 1976 SC 1947. (Para 16) – Relied.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.