Back
MANOJ BAJAJ
Usha – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to cognizance based on fir (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. arguments on civil dispute and retaliation (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. distinguishing appeal routes under atrocities act (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 4. cognizance handling and inherent powers (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 5. limits on hearing and evidence at cognizance (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 6. inherent powers vs statutory appeal remedies (Para 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 7. high court's role in preventing injustice (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 8. cognizance order scrutiny and appeals (Para 33 , 34 , 35) |
| 9. final order and appellate directions (Para 36 , 37 , 38 , 39) |
| 10. partial allowance of appeals (Para 40) |
JUDGMENT :
(Manoj Bajaj, J.) :
1. Appellants-Accused have filed the above separate appeals under Section 14-A(1) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 to challenge the impugned order dated 17.8.2023 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Mathura in Case Crime No. 321 of 2022, under Sections 147 , 148, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, whereby while taking cognizance of the offences cont
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
