Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT, (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
Pranjal Sharma, S/o. Late Padmadhar Sarma – Appellant
Versus
Central Bureau Of Investigation (CBI), Rep. By SC, CBI Anti-Corruption Branch, (ACB) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual basis of corruption allegations under pc act (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. applicability of section 482 crpc for quashing proceedings (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. prohibition of mini-trials in quashing applications (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
JUDGMENT :
SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND, J.
Heard learned Counsel Mr. P. Mahanta for the Petitioners, Nirmalendu Saha who is the petitioner of Criminal Petition No.438/2026 and Pranjal Sharma, the petitioner of Criminal Petition No. 441/ 2026. Nirmalendu Saha was a Professor of the NEHU University, whereas Pranjal Sharma was a businessman. Charge sheet has been laid against both the petitioners, Nirmalendu Saha and Pranjal Sharma and both the petitioners have filed the aforementioned petitions to quash the charge sheet laid against them with an additional prayer to quash the FIR lodged against them. Both the petitions are taken up together as the petitions stem from the same cause of action
2. It is submitted by the learned Standing Counsel, CBI Ms. M. Kumari that the genesis of the case is that both the accused petitioners, Nirmalendu Saha and Pranjal Sarma are alleged to have been involved in engaging in corrupt
Illegal gratification – In a case where investigation is completed, Court is not required to appreciate evidence for quashing criminal proceeding – To appreciate evidence is function of Criminal Cour....
Charges under Section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act require a substantive offence to be present and can be altered by the court before judgment, according to legal precedents.
The prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case of forgery or misappropriation against the petitioner, leading to the quashing of all proceedings.
At the charge framing stage, courts must accept prosecution materials as true without conducting a mini-trial, determining only if prima facie evidence exists to proceed.
The court established that prior approval is mandatory for investigating public servants under the Prevention of Corruption Act when the alleged offenses relate to their official duties, and failure ....
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
