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

2010 Supreme(Online)(J&K) 33

JAMMU AND KASHMIR HIGH COURT
Barin Ghosh, C. J.
Janak Singh v. State of J. and K. and Another


Table of Content
1. applicant was previously in government service. (Para 1 , 4 , 5)
2. issues of charge framing and cognizance under the act. (Para 2 , 3 , 6)
3. court's obligation at the charge framing stage. (Para 7 , 9)
4. final ruling: application dismissed. (Para 10)

1. At the time when the charge - sheet was filed, applicant was in Government service, inasmuch as order of premature retirement stood quashed by an order passed on a writ petition. The date when the Special Judge Anti - corruption refused to discharge the applicant and framed charge against him, applicant having had reached the normal age of superannuation, stood retired from Government service.

2. Applicant contends that as on the date the charge - sheet, i.e. Police Report was filed before the Court, that is the date when the Court is deemed to have taken cognizance and S.6 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 2006 debars the Court from taking cognizance. The word 'cognizance' means 'being aware' specially in a legitimate or official way. No doubt, when the Police Report was filed, Special Judge Anti - corruption became aware that the charge - sheet has been filed. The question is, can it be said that on the said









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