SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1992 Supreme(J&K) 77

K.K.GUPTA
N. K. Jain – Appellant
Versus
State Of J&K Through C. B. I – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Advocate For Appellant: R.P. Bakshi
Advocate For Respondent: D.P. Gupta

1. Petitioner, partner of firm M/S Vimal Enterprises Gangyal, Jammu, has been prosecuted by C. B. I. Jammu for the commission of an offence under sec. 165-A, R. P, C. for allegedly offering an amount of Rs.25000/- to the Manager Insurance company as bribe for settlement of insurance claim and case against him is pending disposal in the Court of Special Judge Anti -Corruption Jammu. During the course of trial he moved an application for quashing the proceedings on the ground that C. B. I. had no jurisdiction to investigate a case under sec. 165--A. Ranbir Penal Code, (R. P. C.), as the said organisation has not been authorised to exercise such powers. Learned Special Judge after obtaining objections from the other side dismissed the same holding that by virtue of notifications issued under sections 3 and 5 of Delhi Police Establishment Act, abetment and conspiracies have been included and sec. 165-A, R. P. C. is an off-shoot of sec. 161-R.P.C. already incorporated in the notification. The petitioner aggrieved of that order has filed the present petition under sec. 561-A, Cr. P. C. for quashing F. I. R. registered in the case and the subsequent proceedings lodged in the court of Spe












Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top