Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932, Section 10 - - In the instant case, notification issued u/s 10 of the Act, declaring Ss.186, 188, 189, 295-A, 298, 505 or 507 IPC when committed in U.T. of Goa, Daman and Diu to be cognizable and Ss.188 or 506 IPC to be no, bailable when committed in said territory - Validity - Said notification is valid and operative in area concerned and..........
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 138, 142, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 470 -- Dishonour of cheque - Complaint represented beyond 30 days fixed by Supreme Court following decision of Supreme Court in Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod's case - Condonation of delay - Position as clarified in the N.I. Amendment Ordinance 2015 (No.6 of 2015), petitioners can be..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 147, 148, 149, 302, 336, 427, 504, 120B, Criminal Amendment Act, Section 7 - - Rioting - Murder - Prayer as to transfer of case to C.B.I for investigation by accused - Investigation of Criminal case may not be conducted at the choice of accused but fair investigation is right of both complainant and accused - No proper reason to say that..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 147, 148, 149, 302, 336, 427, 504, 120B, Criminal Amendment Act, Section 7 - - Rioting - Murder - Prayer for instituting a commission of Judicial Inquiry - It is a criminal case in which specific allegation has been made in FIR - There is no valid reason requiring judicial enquiry headed by Judge of High Court sitting or retired - Prayer..........
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, Court has to determine as to..........
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 criminal Court on and after that date,..........
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 next of kin, who can establish..........
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 u/proviso to S.372 does not get..........
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - - Trial - Offences punishable u/s.408, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC - Case was pending before Magistrate against appellant as on date Amendment Act came into force - Magistrate on receipt of a charge-sheet which tantamount to institution of a case against appellant committed case to Sessions as three of the offences with which he was charged..........
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - - Trial - Changing forum of trial of certain offences - Retrospective application - On the date amendment came into force no case had been instituted against appellant nor Magistrate had taken cognizance against appellant - Held, any amendment shifting forum of trial had to be on principle retrospective in nature in absence of any indication..........
