PRAKASH SHRIVASTAVA
Taranjeet Singh Hora – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. through P. S. Betma, Indore – Respondent
1. This order will govern the disposal of MCRC Nos. 18921/17, 19005/17 & 19016/17 since it is submitted by counsel for the parties that all these MCRCs involve the same issue on the identical fact situation.
2. These MCRCs have been filed by the petitioners Taranjeet Singh Hora and Harmans Singh Hora for quashing the FIRs registered against them. In M.Cr.C. No. 18921/2017 the prayer is for quashing of FIR No.449 dated 5.11.2016, in M.Cr.C. No.19005/17 the prayer is for quashing of FIR No.448 and in M.Cr.C. No.19016/17 the prayer is for quashing of FIR No.447. All these FIRs have been registered on the same date alleging commission of offence by the petitioners under Section 420, 467, 468, 120B and 34 of the IPC.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the three FIRs relate to the same transaction and they are registered in the same police station within a short interval, therefore, only one FIR ought to have been registered and the subsequent complaints should have been added in the first FIR. He further submits that no offence on merit is made out against the petitioners who are the directors of TDS Infra Estate Developers Pvt. Ltd. and partners of Bhaij
Anju Chaudhary v. State of U.P. (2013) 6 SCC 384
C. Muniappan and others Vs. State of Tamil Nadu reported in 2010(9) SCC 567
C. Muniappan and others Vs State of Tamil Nadu" reported in (2010) 9 SCC 567
Chirag M. Pathak and others Vs. Dollyben Kantilal Patel and others reported in 2018(1) SCC 330
Dineshbhai Chandubhai Patel Vs. State of Gujarat and others reported in (2018) 3 SCC 104
Kari Choudhary v. Sita Devi [(2002) 1 SCC 714
Mohan Baitha v. State of Bihar [(2001) 4 SCC 350]
Munshiram Vs. State of Rajasthan and another reported in (2018) 5 SCC 678
P. Sreekumar Vs. State of Kerala and others reported in 2018(4) SCC 579
Rita Nag v. State of West Bengal [(2009) 9 SCC 129]
Ramlal Narang v. State (Delhi Admn.) [(1979) 2 SCC 322]
State of Tamil Nadu Vs. S. Martin and others reported in (2018) 5 SCC 718
State of Karnataka Vs. M. Devendrappa and another reported in 2002(3) SCC 89
State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jeelani and others reported in 2017(2) SCC 779
T.T. Antony v. State of Kerala (2001) 6 SCC 181
Upkar Singh Vs. Ved Prakash and others reported in 2004 (13) SCC 292
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.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
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.