Srinivas.B.S.S.T
13 May 2009 at 21:03
Under what provision of Cr.P.C. a discharge petition seeking the discharge of the Accused from NI Act case should be filed?
Is it under Section 239 Cr.P.C to discharge or Under Section 204 Cr.P.C to recall the process issued against the Accused?. Awaiting replies of Learned Members. Srinivas BSST
Sandeep Budhimania
12 May 2009 at 12:59
Dear Sir,
My name is Sandeep, i have a case of 138 NIA running on me. It's not actually check bouncing it's "Stop Payment" case. Two months back my opponent asked for the cheque which was stopped by us due to some reasons. We submitted the Draft of RS.3,50,000/- in the court. But, he never turned up for the draft.Court also directed his lawyer & him to present before the court.It's already 2 months of submission of draft. But there's no clue of him.
I would like to know what actually he could do more out of it. Would that be any more harm for me or how much harm can he do to me Legally. I never had any intentions of stop payment.Please advice me with your expert guidance. Thanks
A.Mohamed Thaheer
12 May 2009 at 10:26
Please clarify the following:
FIR filed on 28-09-2004
Sanction for prosecution was issued on 18-07-2007
Investigation completed by the police officer only on 07-05-2008, i.e nearly 11 months before completion of the investigation
Final report filed in the court on 26-06-2008
summoned on 05-07-2008
Appeared on the court as ordered by the court.
The Special Judge has got the power to deal this case under the prevention of corruption act, 1988 was issued by the Governor only on 11-01-2009.
In the above circumstance, the cognizance offence taken by the Special Judge and the initation of the process of the court under the criminal procedure code is legally valid?
The important point is that the sanction for prosecution under section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 should be obtained ONLY AFTER COMPLETION OF INVESTIGATION BY THE POLICE OFFICERS AND PLACING ALL THE MATERIALS BEFORE THE SANCTIONING AUTHORITY FOR PERUSAL OF DOCUMENTS AND APPLICATION OF MIND TO HAVE KNOWLEDGE WHETHER PRIMAFACI CASE IS MADE OUT AND WHETHER IT IS NECESSARY FOR ISSUE OF SANCTION FOR PROSECUTION.
PLEASE QUOTE THE RELEVANT CITATION OF SUPREME COURT CASE LAW IN FAVOR OF THE ACCUSED.
A.Mohamed Thaheer
12 May 2009 at 10:23
Please clarify the following:
FIR filed on 28-09-2004
Sanction for prosecution was issued on 18-07-2007
Investigation completed by the police officer only on 07-05-2008, i.e nearly 11 months before completion of the investigation
Final report filed in the court on 26-06-2008
summoned on 05-07-2008
Appeared on the court as ordered by the court.
The Special Judge has got the power to deal this case under the prevention of corruption act, 1988 was issued by the Governor only on 11-01-2009.
In the above circumstance, the cognizance offence taken by the Special Judge and the initation of the process of the court under the criminal procedure code is legally valid?
The important point is that the sanction for prosecution under section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 should be obtained ONLY AFTER COMPLETION OF INVESTIGATION BY THE POLICE OFFICERS AND PLACING ALL THE MATERIALS BEFORE THE SANCTIONING AUTHORITY FOR PERUSAL OF DOCUMENTS AND APPLICATION OF MIND TO HAVE KNOWLEDGE WHETHER PRIMAFACI CASE IS MADE OUT AND WHETHER IT IS NECESSARY FOR ISSUE OF SANCTION FOR PROSECUTION.
PLEASE QUOTE THE RELEVANT CITATION OF SUPREME COURT CASE LAW IN FAVOR OF THE ACCUSED.
A.Mohamed Thaheer
12 May 2009 at 10:22
Please clarify the following:
FIR filed on 28-09-2004
Sanction for prosecution was issued on 18-07-2007
Investigation completed by the police officer only on 07-05-2008, i.e nearly 11 months before completion of the investigation
Final report filed in the court on 26-06-2008
summoned on 05-07-2008
Appeared on the court as ordered by the court.
The Special Judge has got the power to deal this case under the prevention of corruption act, 1988 was issued by the Governor only on 11-01-2009.
In the above circumstance, the cognizance offence taken by the Special Judge and the initation of the process of the court under the criminal procedure code is legally valid?
The important point is that the sanction for prosecution under section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 should be obtained ONLY AFTER COMPLETION OF INVESTIGATION BY THE POLICE OFFICERS AND PLACING ALL THE MATERIALS BEFORE THE SANCTIONING AUTHORITY FOR PERUSAL OF DOCUMENTS AND APPLICATION OF MIND TO HAVE KNOWLEDGE WHETHER PRIMAFACI CASE IS MADE OUT AND WHETHER IT IS NECESSARY FOR ISSUE OF SANCTION FOR PROSECUTION.
PLEASE QUOTE THE RELEVANT CITATION OF SUPREME COURT CASE LAW IN FAVOR OF THE ACCUSED.
Ranganath
11 May 2009 at 20:54
Ld Counsels,
When a complaint was made alleging dowry demand and later it was withdrawn after enquiry without registering FIR.
Is the police correct in not registering a FIR and allow for withdrawal. Since dowry demand is a non-compoundable offense is it permissible in law to let the complainant withdraw it with out registering FIR. Another complaint was filed with additional allegations.
How many days can a complaint be kept in pending petition enquiry state.
Please clarify
umapandya
10 May 2009 at 19:55
1)if a person under trial is in custody for a period greater than the term of sentence that can be given to him if he is convicted then is it a suffecient ground for bail 2)what are the sections under which person can claim for right to bail due to oldage
anand
10 May 2009 at 18:21
my dad was main accuse in one of the case and some of his property was with court. now that he is dead , what will happen to that property which is with court.
Chetan
08 May 2009 at 18:10
I am the Non-applicant
The applicant filed an application u/s 12 in textual format.
Whereas I raise preliminary objection stating that the Application shall be made by aggrived person in Form II as prescribed by the Rule 6 of the said Act.
Is it necessary to makes application in Form II as per rule 6 of the Said Act.
If any case laws pls provide.
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Cross Examination of the Complainant u/s. 138 closed.
In a criminal complaint u/s 138, 141, 142 Due to the absence of the complainant for cross examination after partial cross examination the Honourable Magistrate has closed the cross examination.
The Advocate for the complainant has moved an application for reversal of the order. I am the accused and the Honourable Magistrate has asked for my SAY.
I will appreciate if my knowledgeable friends will guide me if I can point out the following in my reply.
1. Can I submit a list of various irregularites by the complainant.
2. Can I submit a list of variance in the Affidavit and submission made under oath by the complainant.
3. Can I take cover of sec 87 for material alteration.
4. Can I ask the Honourable Court for suitable action for Perjury for sr.no.2 above.
5. Can I seek cost from the complainants.
6. Can I seek damages from the complainant.
7. Can I seek for dissmissal of the case, my acquittal and cancelation of personal bond.
8. Can I pray that the court take cutody of the balance blank cheques in custody of the complainant.
Thanks