DIPAK MISRA, PRAFULLA C.PANT
Sharat Babu Digumarti – Appellant
Versus
Govt. of NCT of Delhi – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Dipak Misra, J.
Leave granted.
2. The appellant along one Avnish Bajaj and others was arrayed as an accused in FIR No. 645 of 2004. After the investigation was concluded, charge sheet was filed before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate who on 14.02.2006 took cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 292 and 294 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (for short, “the IT Act”) against all of them. Avnish Bajaj filed Criminal Misc. Case No. 3066 of 2006 for quashment of the proceedings on many a ground before the High Court of Delhi which vide order dated 29.05.2008 came to the conclusion that prima facie case was made out under Section 292 IPC, but it expressed the opinion that Avinish Bajaj, the petitioner in the said case, was not liable to be proceeded under Section 292 IPC and, accordingly, he was discharged of the offence under Sections 292 and 294 IPC. However, he was prima facie found to have committed offence under Section 67 read with Section 85 of the IT Act and the trial court was directed to proceed to the next stage of passing of order of charge uninfluenced by the observations made in the order of the Hi
Aneeta Hada v. Godfather Travels and Tours (P) Ltd.
Ranjit D. Udeshi v. State of Maharashtra
Shreya Singhal v. Union of India
Kameshwar Prasad v. State of Bihar
Central Prison v. Ram Manohar Lohia
Devidas Ramachandra Tuljapurkar v. State of Maharashtra
Shri Ram Narain v. Simla Banking & Industrial Co. Ltd.
Talcher Municipality v. Talcher Regulated Market Committee
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.