Civil Procedure List of Assigned Cases (Jurisdiction)Full description
Full description
POLITICAL LAWFull description
yhgjh
Full description
Full description
cases
Full Cases of Legal FormsFull description
CONSTI
Based on the syllabus by Judge Christine Muga-Abad, USJ-R School of Law. NB: This is my own compilation, I personally read and digested the following cases.Full description
This research paper is a summary of important cases on the subject in a chronological order starting from landmark judgments to latest judgments.
Full description
List of bondage positionsFull description
list of algorithm
statFull description
List of Amal
news
complete list of ology
List of Anabolic SteroidFull description
Finally, Here is the Contractors list in USA. As you can see in this list its Xls.file i made it to make it easy for you to make yuor choice of what type of Contractor that you are looking f…Full description
R 54: R.P. Kapoor v State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866 He!: It is well-established that the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court can be exercised to quash proceedings in a proper case either to prevent the abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. Ordinarily criminal proceedings instituted against an accused person must be tried under the provisions of the Code and the High Court would be reluctant to interfere with the said proceedings at an interlocutory stage. It is not possible desirable or expedient to lay down any inflexible rule which would govern the exercise of this inherent jurisdiction. However we may indicate some categories of cases where the inherent jurisdiction can and should be exercised for quashing the proceedings. !here may be cases where it may be possible for the High Court to ta"e the view that the institution or continuance of criminal proceedings against an accused person may amount to the abuse of the process of the court or that the quashing of the impugned proceedings would secure the ends of justice. # $$% #ajendra &rasad v 'ashir
"a#t$: A%%r&eve! b' t(e or!er of t(e A!!&t&ona Se$$&on$ )u!%e, *ee% b' +(( #(ar%e$ +ere frae! a%a&n$t t(e for offen#e$ pun&$(abe un!er Se#t&on$ 14- 148 / /4 149 4/- an! 95 of t(e In!&an Pena Co!e, t(e re$pon!ent$ f&e! a pet&t&on un!er Se#t&on 48/ of t(e Co!e of Cr&&na Pro#e!ure (ere&nafter referre! to a$ t(e Co!e2 pra'&n% for 3ua$(&n% t(e afore$a&! or!er. Ho!&n% t(at t(e a%&$trate, be&n% t(e #ourt of #o&tta, (a! no po+er to a!! four re$pon!ent$ a$ a##u$e!per$on$ +&t(out a!opt&n% pro#e!ure a$ pre$#r&be! un!er Se#t&on /0 of t(e Co!e, t(e H&%( Court ao+e! t(e pet&t&on of t(e re$pon!ent$ an! $et a$&!e or!er t(e #ourt b' +(( #o%n&an#e of offen#e un!er Se#t&on 95 of t(e In!&an Pena Co!e +a$ ta7en. (e #a$e (a$ been rean!e! ba#7 to t(e earne! a%&$trate to (o! &n3u&r' a$ per t(e prov&$&on$ of Se#t&on /0/2 of t(e Co!e +&t( !&re#t&on t(at &f (e f&n!$ t(at a #a$e u n!er Se#t&on 95 IPC &$ a!e out, (e +& pa$$ ne#e$$ar' or!er$ a%a &n$t t(e a##u$e! per$on$ an! #o&t t(e #a$e to t(e Se$$&on$ )u!%e, &f ne#e$$ar'. He!: !his Court held that though the power of the High Court under (ection )*+ of the Code is very wide yet the same must be exercised sparingly and cautiously particularly in a case where the petitioner is shown to have already invo"ed the revisional jurisdiction under (ection , of the Code. Only in cause where the High Court finds that there has been failure of justice or misuse of judicial mechanism or procedure sentence or order was not correct the High Court may in its discretion prevent the abuse of the process or miscarriage of justice by exercise of jurisdiction under (ection )*+ of the Code. It was further held /Ordinarily when revision has been barred by (ection ,0,1 of the Code a person - accused2complaint - cannot be allowed to ta"e recourse to the revision to the High Court under (ection ,031 or under inherent powers of the High Court under (ection )*+
of the Code since it may amount to circumvention of provisions of (ection ,0,1 or (ection ,0+1 of the Code.