Back
ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY
Amitabh Hazarika S/O Sri Tulen Hazarika – Appellant
Versus
Mainul Hoque S/o Late Saidur Rahman – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Mr. N. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S. C. Biswas, learned counsel for the respondent.
2. The present application is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of proceeding in C.R. Case No. 904/2017 under Section 420/465/468/471/406/403/109/506/34 of IPC instituted by the respondent against the petitioner pending for trial before the learned Court of Munsiff cum Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilasipara. The further challenge is an order dated 16.03.2018 passed by the learned Court of Munsiff cum Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilasipara, whereby summons were issued upon the petitioner under Section 420/465 of IPC.
3. Before dealing in detail the argument of the learned counsel for the parties, let this Court first record the facts which are narrated in the complaint in the following manner:-
It is important to note here that the petitioner is named as accused No. 1 and the learned Magistrate by impugned order issued process only against accused No. 1 along with one Imdadul Hoque.
I. The mother of the complainant is the sole owner of a plot of land measuring 1 Bigha 3 Kathas 0.43 Lechas covered by Dag No. 234 under Periodic Khiraj Pa
The court ruled that civil disputes do not automatically preclude criminal liability, but allegations must clearly disclose a criminal offence.
(1) A bonafide criminal case cannot be stifled at threshold by High Court.(2) In order to examine as to whether factual contents of FIR disclose any cognizable offence or not, High Court cannot act l....
Inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC do not permit quashing proceedings when prima facie evidence of a crime is present, mandating a trial to ascertain truth.
Criminal intent in property transactions leads to proceedings under IPC, regardless of parallel civil suits.
The court can exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C to quash criminal proceedings if they amount to an abuse of the process of the court or if quashing the proceedings would serve ....
FIR is an abuse of process of law and/or the same has been lodged only to harass the accused, the same can be quashed in exercise of powers vested under Article 226 of the Constitution or in exercise....
Bona fide purchasers cannot be implicated in forgery or fraud where they have no part in wrongdoing, and prior allegations point to their victimization.
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
