Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT, (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY
Nizame Uddin Barbhuiya, S/o. Nurul Islam Barbhuiya – Appellant
Versus
Debasish Dutta, S/o. Sri Nikhil Ranjan Dutta – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. prosecution under section 420 ipc and n.i. act are distinct. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. procedural differences preclude combined trials. (Para 6 , 10) |
| 3. charges under section 420 ipc are quashed. (Para 18 , 19) |
JUDGMENT :
(ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY, J.)
1. Heard Mr. P. P. Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. K. K. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam representing the State respondent, Mr. D. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 and Mr. A. K. Bhuyan, learned Amicus Curiae.
2. The present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with Section 401 /397 Cr.P.C. is filed assailing an order dated 29.05.2015 passed in Criminal Revision No. 176/2014 by the learned Additional Session Judge, Cachar, Silchar allowing the revision petition, by setting aside the order dated 09.06.2014 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Cachar Silchar in N.I.Case No. 55/2015, (CR Case No. 55/2012), by which the present petitioners were discharged under Section 420 of the IPC. The further challenge is the order dated 20.10.2016 passed in the said NI Case No.55/2015, whereby, on remand, the learned Additional Chief Ju
Prosecutions under Section 420 IPC and Section 138 N.I. Act are distinct; trial for both based on same facts not permissible due to differing evidentiary requirements.
: Offences under Section 138 of NI Act and Section 420 of IPC are distinct from each other and principle of double jeopardy or rule of estoppel does not come into play.
Judicial Decorum – Judicial decorum demands that if judgments passed by two-Judges’ Bench of equal strength are conflicting, issue of law involved must be referred to a larger Bench as the same is de....
The court clarified the distinction between the elements of offences under Section 138 of the NI Act and Section 420 of the IPC.
The ingredients of the offence under Section 420 IPC must be satisfied for a criminal prosecution to be maintainable, even if a civil dispute exists between the parties. The pendency of a case under ....
The court emphasized that allegations of fraudulent financial transactions satisfy the essential ingredients for criminal liability under IPC Section 420, and cannot be dismissed as merely civil disp....
The intention to cheat or defraud must be established from the inception, and belated complaints may raise a presumption of being for pressuring quick realization of due amounts.
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
