Back
SHAILENDRA SINGH
Kameshwar Ravidas @ Kameshar Ravidas – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
ORDER
Heard Mr. Sunil Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Mr. Ravi Prakash, learned counsel for the O.P. No.2 and Mr. Binod Kumar No.3, learned APP for the State.
2. The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short ‘Cr.P.C.’) against the order dated 21.06.2014 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Nalanda at Biharsharif, in connection with Protest-cum-Complaint Case No. 145(c) of 2013, arising out of Ben P.S. Case No. 79 of 2012 by which the cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code (in short ‘IPC’) has been taken against the petitioners.
3. Mr. Sunil Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that instant matter is an example of malicious prosecution which relates to unnatural death of son of the complainant/informant, in fact, the informant’s son died of an accident when he was riding a tractor and regarding that accident, Ben P.S. Case No. 43 of 2012 was lodged under Sections 279, 304 A and 201 of IPC on the basis of fardbeyan of one, Ram Pravesh Ravidas, brother-in-law of the complainant (O.P. No.2) in which a proper investigation wa
Murder and criminal conspiracy – Cognizance of offences – Court cannot shut its eyes when there are strong circumstances suggesting malicious prosecution by informant or complainant.
A claim for malicious prosecution requires reliable evidence; if the prosecution fails to substantiate its claims, the accused may claim compensation for wrongful prosecution.
Criminal proceedings quashed under inherent powers as malicious counterblast to matrimonial cruelty case, with alibi evidence, no injury proof, and absurd improbable allegations amounting to abuse of....
Cognizance under serious charges requires substantive evidence; mere allegations without corroboration do not justify legal proceedings.
Malicious prosecution requires proving malice and lack of reasonable cause. The court established the appellants acted without sufficient basis, resulting in damages awarded for mental anguish.
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
