KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
M.NAGAPRASANNA, J
MOHAMMED KALEEM AHMED – Appellant
Versus
NATIONAL INVESTIGATING AGENCY – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the review petition. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court's observations on jurisdictional error. (Para 3 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. parties' arguments regarding jurisdiction. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. ratio decidendi concerning appeals and inherent powers. (Para 8) |
ORAL ORDER
2. The writ petitions in W.P.No.8725/2021 C/w.W.P.Nos.5547/2021 9277/2021 and W.P.No.9681/2021 had been preferred calling in question the proceedings in Spl.C.No.141/2021 registered for the offences punishable under Section s 16 , 18 and 20 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 ('the UA(P)A' for short), Section s 143 , 147, 148, 427. 149 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('the IPC ' for short) (including Sections 120B , 145, 188, 353 of the IPC and excluding Section 148 of the IPC in W.P.No.9681/2021) and Section 2 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 .
4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the writ petitions were dismissed. After dismissal of the writ petitions, the review petitions are preferred on certain reasons that the judgments relied on by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners were not completely considered and there was overlapping of the f
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.