Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
ANU MALHOTRA
Joginder Singh Lather – Appellant
Versus
State (NCT of Delhi) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition seeks to set aside proceedings (Para 1) |
| 2. petitioner joined investigation but was non-cooperative (Para 2) |
| 3. section 82 does not apply to the offences charged (Para 3) |
| 4. proceedings under section 82 set aside (Para 4) |
| 5. petition and applications disposed of (Para 5) |
JUDGMENT
Anu Malhotra, J. The petitioner, vide the present petition seeks the setting aside of the entire proceedings emanating out of FIR No.59/2019, PS EOW under Sections 406/420/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 qua the petitioner including the order dated 16.10.2020 of the Court of the learned CMM, District-North, Rohini Courts, New Delhi, whereby, the proceedings under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. were initiated against the petitioner and order dated 15.01.2021, whereby, the proceedings under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. against the petitioner were not withdrawn despite the petitioner having put in appearance before the Court.
2. The status report dated 01.02.2021 of the ACP, EOW, New Delhi reflects to the effect that the petitioner herein pursuant to order dated 08.12.2020 of this Court, whereby, the interim protection was granted to the petitioner with directions to him to join the invest
Proceedings under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. cannot apply to offences like Sections 406, 420, and 120B of IPC. The intention of Section 82 is to ensure appearance before court, which was achieved by t....
Orders under Section 82 Cr.P.C. must not be issued mechanically; accused should be given the opportunity to appear before the court to avoid being treated as absconders.
Initiating proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. requires adherence to legal standards; mere absence from court does not justify such measures.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. cannot be initiated in a routine manner and pre-requisites of Section 82 Cr.P.C. need to be complied with....
The automatic vacation of stay orders is invalid if trials have not concluded, reaffirming litigants' substantive rights.
The proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. are solely for the purpose of securing the accused's presence in court.
A petition under S.482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings becomes infructuous and is liable to be dismissed when the underlying trial has already commenced, with liberty granted to the petitioner ....
The court has the authority to direct the trial court to decide an application under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code within a specified time frame.
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
