Legal Reference Library

In Arun Kumar Sharma Vs. State of U.P. , the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court has held that a Magistrate may dismiss a complaint (a) if he finds that no offence has been committed upon the statement of the complainant; (b) if he distrust the statements by the complainant, and (c) if he finds that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding. For issuing the process against the accused, it has to be only seen whether prima facie case has been made out. The Magistrate is not required to go deep into the probative value of material on record. The Magistrate before issuing process against the accused must exercise his judicial mind to the facts of the case and law applicable thereto. The Court is not required to assess the evidence and consider the probabilities or improbabilities of the version of the complaint and or evaluate the sworn statement of the complainant or witness. The Magistrate under law at this stage is not permitted to embark upon meticulous examination of the evidence or ...

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) has held that a complaint under Section 12 (1)(c) of the Consumer Protection (CP) Act can be filed only on behalf of or for the benefit of all the consumers, having a common interest or a common grievance and seeking the same/identical relief against the same person. It has also been made clear that in a class action suit (complaint) instituted under Section 12(1) (c) of the Consumer Protection Act, the pecuniary jurisdiction is to be determined on the basis of aggregate of the value of the goods purchased or the services hired or availed by all the consumers on whose behalf or for whose benefit the complaint is instituted and the total compensation claimed in respect of such consumers. Answering a reference to it, the full bench comprising NCDRC president D.K. Jain, members V.K. Jain and B.C. Gupta made the following observations: A complaint under Section 12 (1)(c) of the Consumer Protection Act can be filed only on behalf o...

Explaining the difference between Sections 301 and 302 CrPC, the Court said that the legislative intention is manifestly clear that prosecution in a Sessions Court cannot be conducted by anyone other than the public prosecutor. It is because the legislature reminds the State that the policy must strictly conform to fairness in the trial of an accused in a Sessions Court, however, as far as Section 302 CrPC is concerned, power is conferred on the Magistrate to grant permission to the complainant to conduct the prosecution independently. It was further clarified that the role of the informant or the private party is limited during the prosecution of a case in a Court of Session and the counsel engaged by him is required to act under the directions of public prosecutor. The bench of Dipak Misra and A.K. Goel, JJ also clarified that the said provision applies to every stage including the stage of framing charge inasmuch as the complainant is permitted by the Magistrate to conduct the pros...

The Punjab and Haryana high court has held that merely being called to the police station in relation to a complaint does not amount to criminal defamation. The HC passed these orders while dismissing an application filed by a retired colonel from Rewari district, who had sought directions to prosecute a person for criminal defamation because he had to go to the police station after a false complaint was filed against him. The plea by Col Ranbir Singh Yadav (retd) had earlier been dismissed by a court in Rewari on May 2, 2015. In his plea, Col Yadav had sought registration of a case under sections 499 (defamation) and 500 (punishment for defamation) of the IPC against one Chet Ram. Article referred: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chandigarh/Calling-to-police-station-not-defamation-says-HC/articleshow/53590187.cms

In ANJAN BISWAS vs CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA AND OTHER, the petitioner’s submission was that either a public employer not lodge a criminal complaint against an employee who is perceived to have committed a criminal offence and against whom a departmental action is  initiated; or, if a criminal complaint is lodged in respect of the same matters, the departmental action has to be suspended till the criminal trial is concluded. In reply while dismissing the Writ petition, the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court decided that - ........ 24. The life of law may be experience and not logic, but that does not imply that the law is illogical or asinine. That criminal matters are not disposed of in a hurry in this country is a matter of public knowledge and has been judicially recognised for decades. Notwithstanding the present fashion of even questioning the obvious and irrefutable by taking advantage of the rules of evidence, the judicial system cannot be mocked by suggesting the absurd. Whi...

The Supreme Court in Standard Chartered Bank vs. State of Maharashtra has reiterated that a Director cannot get a Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act complaint against him quashed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, merely on the ground that apart from the basic averment no particulars are given in the complaint about his role In this case, the High Court had quashed the summons issued to director and other officials of a company, which had issued cheques to the bank which were dishonoured, singularly on the ground that there are no allegations against them connecting them with the affairs of the Company. The Bank preferred the appeal before Apex court. Apex Court referred to Gunmala Sales Pvt. Ltd. v. Anu Mehta and Ors. wherein it was held “ When in view of the basic averment process is issued the complaint must proceed against the Directors. But, if any Director wants the process to be quashed by filing a petition under Section 482 of the Code on the ground that only ...

It is “not legal and logical” to reject plea without giving any opportunity to a complainant to lead evidence, a Delhi court has observed while asking a magistrate to pass a reasoned order on a complaint against an IAS officer for allegedly using a false OBC certificate. Special judge Anju Bajaj Chandna said observations given by metropolitan magistrate in the order dismissing the complaint against the bureaucrat and others were “premature” and the complainant should have been given an opportunity to lead pre-summoning evidence in support of his plea. The court’s order came on a revision petition challenging the magisterial court’s last year order in which the plea seeking registration of FIR against the IAS officer and two others was dismissed. Delhi-based complainant Mahesh Kumar had alleged in his plea that the IAS officer had got into civil services on the basis of “false, forged and fabricated non-creamy layer OBC certificate” and his father had given a false statement in an...

Central Information Commission: CIC has observed that although Section 16 of Sexual Harassment of Women in the Work Place (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 specifically prohibits publication and communication of contents of the complaint made under Section 9, identity and addresses of the aggrieved women etc., to the public, press and media, however, it does not prohibit the disclosure of certified copy of complaint to the person against whom complaint is made. The case relates to a complaint containing allegations of sexual harassment, filed by PG students against two Professors of Delhi University. Earlier, nine students of Delhi University (Faculty of Medical Sciences) filed complaint against Head of their department and his wife who were their thesis guides, alleging sexual harassment. The appellant wife sought information related to the complaint from the University but was denied on the ground that disclosure of such information would be inappropriate, as it would...