IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Brajesh Chand Vidhyarthi @ Brajesh Chandra Vidyaarthi – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand Opposite Parties – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court heard the parties and the state did not appear (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. initiation of criminal proceedings and allegations (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. defense arguments and claims of false accusations (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. requirements for charges of cheating and criminal breach of trust (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 5. quashing of criminal proceedings due to insufficient evidence (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
JUDGMENT :
Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.
Heard the parties.
2. Though, notice has validly been served upon the opposite party no.2, yet no one turns up on behalf of the opposite party no.2 and State in spite of repeated calls.
3. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with a prayer to quash and set aside the entire criminal proceeding initiated against the petitioners in connection with Complaint Case No.2008 of 2019 including the order dated 04.10.2019 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Ranchi by which the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Ranchi has found prima facie case for the offences punishable under Sections 420 /406 of the INDIAN PEN
Krishna Lal Chawla and Others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another
Haji Iqbal alias Bala through S.P.O.A. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others
Deepak Gaba & Others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.