Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Pali Diwan – Appellant
Versus
Central Bureau of Investigations – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RAKESH KAINTHLA, J.
1. The petitioner has filed the present petition for quashing of the order dated 06.7.2024, passed by learned Special Judge (CBI), Shimla (learned Trial Court), vide which the application filed by the petitioner (accused before the learned Trial Court) seeking her discharge was dismissed. (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they are arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience.)
2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are that the CBI filed a charge sheet stating that the petitioner, Mrs. Pali Diwan, Partner of M/s Resource Foods, submitted an application dated 29.9.2010 in the prescribed format along with the relevant documents to avail a non-recurring grant-in-aid for setting up the Integrated Food Chain Project at village Bersa, P.O. Manjohali, Tehsil Nalagarh. The petitioner is a director of M/s Resource Food Private Limited, and she was part of a conspiracy to avail the grant-in-aid; hence, it was prayed that an action be taken against her and the other accused.
3. Learned Trial Court found sufficient reasons to summon the accused. When the accused appeared, she and the other accused fil
The prosecution failed to prove the charges of forgery and conspiracy beyond reasonable doubt due to irregularities in evidence collection.
The prosecution could not establish the case against the appellant under Section 120(B)/468 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 13(2) & Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 19....
At the discharge stage under Section 227 Cr.P.C., the court must consider only the prosecution's materials, and strong suspicion is sufficient to proceed with the trial.
Cooperation with criminal investigations under Section 91 Cr.P.C. does not necessitate prior arrest and the issuance of notices for signature samples is valid, preserving investigative authority.
The court ruled that charges framed against an accused must have sufficient evidence of demand and acceptance to uphold prosecutorial validity; otherwise, it constitutes an infringement of fundamenta....
The court highlighted the necessity for a thorough evaluation of evidence before rejecting a discharge application, emphasizing that mere suspicion without substantial proof is insufficient for prose....
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
