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

DELHI HIGH COURT
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, RAJNISH BHATNAGAR
Court on its own motion – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


ORDER

1. The present criminal reference petition under Section 395 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, raises the following questions of law for adjudication by this Court:

    "Q1. Whether registration of FIR, if made out otherwise as per law, can be made conditional upon requirement of approval from senior police officers?

    Q2. Whether Cr. P.C. or any other law for the time being in force admits such standing orders to be issued as would override the express statutory provisions as well as mandates of the courts higher above regarding registration of FIR by adding a pre-condition for seeking approval from senior police officers?

    Q3. Whether every offence involving a monetory transaction such as cheating, criminal breach of trust, forgery etc falls withing the ambit of the definition of "commercial disputes" as referred to in Lalita Kumari V. State of U.P., S.L.P.(Crl.) No.5986 of 2006, necessitating conducting of a preliminary enquiry prior to registration of FIR and whether such preliminary enquiry includes within its scope a prerequisite of seeking approval of the higher police officials before registration of FIR.

    Q4. In case the answers to question no.1, 2 and/or 3 are in the n

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