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

2016 Supreme(Jhk) 796

SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR
Eric Minz, S/o Late Alfius Minz – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. B.P. Tetarbe, Advocate.

JUDGMENT :

Shree Chandrashekhar, J.

Seeking quashing of order dated 19.11.2007 whereby, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Simdega took cognizance of the offence in Simdega PS Case No. 168 of 2006 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 02 of 2007, the applicant has filed the present Criminal Miscellaneous Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

2. Heard.

3. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a Contractor of Bazar Samittee and the only allegation against him is that he issued receipt on realisation of market-fee. It is contended that on bare perusal of the allegations against the applicant, offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act is not made out against him.

4. In "State of Punjab v. Kasturi Lal" (2004) 12 SCC 195, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that in exercise of the powers under Section 482 Cr. P.C. the court would be justified to quash any proceeding if it finds that initiation/continuance of it amounts to abuse of the process of court or quashing of these proceedings would otherwise serve the ends of justice. The Court further held that when no offence is disclosed by the complainant, the court may examine the question of fact. In "Indian Oil Cor








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