REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Shreemad Jagadguru Shankaracharya Appellant

V/S

STATE OF KARNATAKA Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

THULY KALI VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [REFERRED TO]
WARYAM SINGH VS. AMARNATH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. VIJAY ANAND MAHARAJ [REFERRED TO]
S A L NARAYAN ROW N D MEHROTRA VS. ISHWARLAL BHAGWANDAS VRAJLAL KEWALDAS [REFERRED TO]
RAMESH VS. GENDALAL MOTILAL PATNI [REFERRED TO]
ARBIND KUMAR SINGH VS. NAND KISHORE PRASAD [REFERRED TO]
S N SHARMA VS. BIPEN KUMAR TIWARI [REFERRED TO]
AHMEDABAD MANUFACTURING AND CALICO PRINTING CO LIMITED AHMEDABAD VS. RAM TAHEL RAMNAND [REFERRED TO]
BABHUTMAL RAICHAND OSWAL VS. LAXMIBAI R TARTA [REFERRED TO]
UMAJI KESHAO MESHRAM VS. RADHIKABAI WIDOW OF ANANDRAO BANAPRKAR [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HARYANA VS. BHAJAN LAL [REFERRED TO]
PEPSI FOODS LIMITED VS. SPECIAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF BIHAR VS. LAL KRISHNA ADVANI [REFERRED TO]
GANGARAM KANDARAM VS. SUNDER CHIKHA AMIN [REFERRED TO]
TAMMANNA VS. RENUKA [REFERRED TO]
DALMIA JAIN AIRWAYS LTD. VS. SUKUMAR MUKHERJEE [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal seeks to challenge the order of the learned single judge dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant, under Article 226 and Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

(2.) THE case of the appellant is as follows: -

(3.) NOTWITHSTANDING the filing of the writ petition and the pendency of these proceedings the CID has proceeded with the investigation in the case initiated against the appellant and this court is informed that the CID is likely to file a Final report before the court below, soon. Be that as it may, the learned Senior Advocate, Shri B.V.Acharya, appearing for the counsel for the appellant, seeks to canvass the following aspects : The First Information Report (FIR) registered in the case (under Section 354A and 506 of the IPC) is on the basis of the complaint dated 26.8.2014 given by the second respondent. The allegations in the complaint are not only hearsay, but also too vague and general and therefore the same could not have been the subject matter of the FIR and hence the same is liable to be quashed.

Click here to view full judgment.

SHREEMAD JAGADGURU SHANKARACHARYA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address