Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
Supreme Court: In a criminal appeal filed against the order passed by the Karnataka High Court, wherein the Court allowed the petition
Supreme Court highlighted that the provision for filing curative petitions was incorporated in Order XLVIII of the 2013 Rules.
by Sanjana Sachdev† and Sanskriti Sinha††
Apart from the statutory power of recall of an ex parte order conferred under the first proviso to Section 209 U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, every Court or Tribunal would have an inherent power to recall an ex parte order to secure the ends of justice.
Allahabad High Court reiterated that at the stage of taking cognizance, the Court should not get in the merits of the case, and at such stage, the Court’s power is limited.
If during course of investigation some credible evidence have been collected, charge sheet has been filed, cognizance has been taken, discharge application has been rejected by the Trial Court by speaking and reasoned order and that order has been upheld by the Revisional Court, by a speaking and reasoned order, then Arvind Kejriwal must participate in the trial proceedings.
The Delhi High Court dismissed an application filed for “recall of earlier order” under Section 151 of CrPC and held that the settled things could not be permitted to be unsettled at the behest of a person who had not been careful enough with regard to his rights and claims.
Rajasthan High Court: The Court exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code (Code), quashed the First
“The High Court, while forming an opinion whether a criminal proceeding or complaint or FIR should be quashed in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC, must evaluate whether the ends of justice would justify the exercise of the inherent power”
“If a man has been wronged, so long as the wrong lies within the human machinery of administration of justice, that wrong must be remedied.”
Delhi High Court: Expressing that, the revisional jurisdiction is not meant to test the waters of what might happen in the trial,
Calcutta High Court: Bibek Chaudhari, J., considered the question as to whether Section 482 CrPC is applicable in relation to an application under
Allahabad High Court: Chandra Dhari Singh, J., expressed that, Merely because the litigation has reached a revisional stage or that even beyond
Himachal Pradesh High Court: Vivek Singh Thakur, J., while exercising powers under Section 482 CrPC, allows the present petition, stating, “… power
Madras High Court: R. Pongiappan, J., addressed the Criminal Original Petition seeking to quash the First Information Report of first respondent police as
Allahabad High Court: Ram Krishna Gautam, J., held that as per Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, while exercising the inherent jurisdiction, High
by Abhinav Sharma & Prajwal Shukla*
Karnataka High Court: B.A. Patil, J., dismissing the present petition, observed, “Taking into consideration the peculiar facts and circumstances under which the
Allahabad High Court: Dr Kaushal Jayendra Thaker, J., addressed a matter with regard to the settlement of divorce proceedings. Parties in the present
Uttaranchal High Court: Ravindra Maithani, J., while discussing the scope of Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and the object