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

2016 Supreme(P&H) 637

FATEH DEEP SINGH
Uppal Credit & Investment Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Ashwani Kumar – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner:Mr. M.S. Sachdev, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. Parshant Sareen, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

Mr. Fateh Deep Singh, J.:- Though with the sole aim and object to bring about uniformity in the criminal procedure in our country, the framers had meandered through overhauling the criminal law which was earlier governing the Presidency Towns and erstwhile provinces through Criminal Procedure Act (16 of 1852), Criminal Procedure Supreme Courts Act, High Court Criminal Procedure Act (12 of 1865), Act 10 of 1872 leading to consolidation of these laws under Criminal Procedure of 1882 (10 of 1882), which was further replaced by Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 (5 of 1898). Having undergone repeated metamorphosis in 1923, 1955 with State amendments and finally the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 came into being by Act 2 of 1974. The primary aim was not only to simplify the procedure and speed-up trials but also to remove anomalies and ambiguities brought about by conflicting decisions of the various High Courts and divergent expression of opinions by the Hon’ble Apex Court. But inspite of the same, certain grey areas still remain which precisely has led to this imbroglio in this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by way of exercise of inherent powers by this Court. The bri















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