Showing : 5191-5200 of 14704 Results

PATNA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2013
Details
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 372-- Proviso (as inserted by Amendment Act 5 of 2009), S.377, 378 - Appeal against acquittal - Right to file - Held, no limitation of time has been provided by Legislature for exercise of such right of appeal by `victim' in terms of said proviso - Hence, in the fact and circumstances of each case,..........
PATNA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2013
Details
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 372-- Proviso (as inserted by Amendment Act 5 of 2009), Ss.377, 378 - Appeal against acquittal - Held, proviso to S.372 Cr.P.C. came into operation w.e.f. December 31, 2009 - Hence, in absence of any legislative intent to contrary, in all cases, in which a judgment and order has been passed by a..........
PATNA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2013
Details
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 372-- Proviso (as inserted by Amendment Act 5 of 2009), Ss.377, 378 - Appeal against acquittal - Right to file - Held, if subject of crime is dead or incapacitated to extent or suffers from such a disability that he/she cannot take steps to exercise his/her right under proviso to S.372, any of his/her..........
PATNA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2013
Details
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 372-- Proviso (as inserted by Amendment Act 5 of 2009), Ss.377, 378 - Appeal against acquittal - Right to file - Held, if any person prefers an appeal in terms of proviso to S.372, solely on the basis of his status as `guardian' or `legal heir', he/she will have to establish legal basis of his/her such..........
PATNA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2013
Details
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 372-- Proviso (as inserted by Amendment Act 5 of 2009), Ss.377, 378 - Appeal against acquittal - Held, once an appeal preferred in terms of proviso to S.372 against an order is entertained by an appellate Court on merits, to whatever result, no fresh/second appeal by any party/person can/should be..........
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 2013
Details
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 468-- Period of limitation - Computation of - Held, for the purpose of computing period of limitation, relevant date is the date of filing complaint/date of institution of prosecution and not the date on which Magistrate takes cognizance...........
PATNA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2013
Details
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 372-- Proviso (as inserted by Amendment Act 5 of 2009), Ss.377, 378 - Appeal against acquittal - Held, no distinction can be made between a case instituted by complainant/informant with police and by complainant before Court directly - An absolute right of victim (complainant or not) to file an appeal..........
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2013
Details
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 473-- Condonation of delay - Charge sheet u/ss 304-A, 337, 338 filed after delay of almost sixteen and half years - Even charge sheet itself prepared after five and half years - Held, charge sheet was prepared after expiry of limitation period and cognizance taken after delay of 16 years is bad in law..........
PATNA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2013
Details
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 372-- Proviso (as inserted by Amendment Act 5 of 2009), Ss.377, 378 - Appeal against acquittal - Right to file - Held, proviso put `victim' at higher pedestal than prosecuting agency or complainant in matter of preferring an appeal against any order of a criminal Court acquitting accused or convicting..........
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2013
Details
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 468, 473, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 304A, 337, 338-- Offence u/ss 337, 338, 304-A IPC - Charge sheet filed after 16 and half years - Order taking cognizance quashed...........

Showing : 5191-5200 of 14704 Results