Back
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
Kumari Prabhavati Sinha, wife of Dr. Amarendra Prasad – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Pankaj Kumar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the O.P.No.2.
2. By order dated 11.2.2013, the O.P.no.2 was called upon and the requisites were filed and pursuant thereto notices were issued, however, nobody has appeared on behalf of the O.P.No.2. From the records it is not clear that whether the notices pursuant to the said order has been served upon the O.P.No.2 or not. However, while deciding the amendment petition by way of I.A. No.3096 of 2022 by which order taking cognizance was challenged and was allowed and amended the O.P.no.2 again directed to be served and accordingly the learned counsel for the petitioners has filed the requisites and Office note suggest that the O.P.no.2 has personally received the notice and the said receiving is kept at Flag-A of the record. Today, when the matter was taken up nobody has responded on behalf of the O.P.no.2 and that is how, this petition has been heard on merit.
3. The present petition has been filed for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Mandu(Kujju) P.S. Case No.216 of 2012 dated 16.08.2012 regist
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the occurrence to take place in public view under section 3(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of A....
The judgment established the importance of meeting the key parameters for registering a case under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and highlighted the interpretation of 'place within ....
The High Court should not stifle a legitimate prosecution and should not consider the defense of the accused in its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that only the Special Court constituted for the purpose of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is compet....
The court reaffirmed that a cognizance order can be quashed if it lacks substantial basis and if allegations raised do not prima facie constitute an offence, highlighting the misuse of protective leg....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of incidents taking place in public view and the caste of the accused being of the informant for taking cognizance under the Sch....
The court established that inherent powers under Section 482 of the CrPC can quash proceedings lacking sufficient evidence or motivated by malice.
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
