DEEPAK GUPTA
Bijay Sankar Saha – Appellant
Versus
State of Tripura – Respondent
1. An important issue arises in this case as to how private complaints filed by the complainants should be dealt with by the Criminal Courts.
2. The brief facts leading to the present petition are that the petitioner Shri Bijay Sankar Saha alleged that he was an executive committee member of the Tripura Truck Owners Syndicate and according to him the accused persons Rupak Barman and Kanai Deb were also members of the executive committee and assumed office of Secretary and Treasurer of the Syndicate respectively. The petitioner has leveled serious allegations against these accused persons alleging that they have misappropriated the funds of the Syndicate etc. I am not dealing with allegations in detail because it would not be appropriate to express any opinion on the merits of the case. However, basically, the allegations were that the accused have committed offences of corruption, malpractice, criminal misappropriation, defalcation and misused their authority and also misused the funds of the Syndicate.
3. This complaint was filed on 07.03.2006 and was transferred to the file of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, West Tripura, who took up the matter on 08.03.2006 and p
Mohd. Yousuf vs. Afaqjahan and Another
State of Karnataka and Another vs. Pastor P. Raju
R.R. Chari vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Darshan Singh Ram Kishan vs. State of Maharashtra
Narayandas Bhagwandas Madhavdas vs. State of West Bengal
Kishun Singh vs. State of Bihar
State of West Bengal vs. Mohd. Khalid
Fakhruddin Ahmad vs. State of Uttaranchal and Another
Ajit Kumar Palit vs. State of West Bengal
Manharibhai Muljibhai Kakadia and Another vs. Shaileshbhai Mohanbhai Patel and Others
Vadilal Panchal vs. Dattatraya Dulaji Ghadigaonker
R.R. Chari v. State of Uttar Pradesh
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.