Content Provider | Supreme Court of India |
---|---|
e-ISSN | 30484839 |
Language | English |
Access Restriction | NDLI |
Subject Keyword | criminal |
Content Type | Text |
Resource Type | Law Judgement |
Jurisdiction | India |
Act(s) Referred | Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) |
Case(s) Referred | Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2 Referred Case 3 Referred Case 4 Referred Case 5 Referred Case 6 Referred Case 7 Referred Case 8 Referred Case 9 Referred Case 10 Referred Case 11 Referred Case 12 Referred Case 13 Referred Case 14 Referred Case 15 |
Case Type | Appeal |
Court | Supreme Court of India |
Disposal Nature | Appeal Disposed Off |
Headnote | Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.340 – Penal Code,1860 – ss.191 and 192 – Respondent/accused-proprietory concernhad shared a business relationship with the appellants – Disputearose between the parties, as a result of which various suits werefiled by the appellants – The respondents filed their written statementsand counter-claims in the said suits filed by the appellants – Theappellants filed criminal complaints and contended that respondent/accused had given false evidence and had forged debit notes andmade false entries in books of accounts – The Magistrate convertedthe said complaints into private complaints and issued process u/ss.191, 192 and 193 IPC – The respondent filed revision applicationsagainst the said orders, in which it was stated that the bar containedin s.195(1)(b)(i) of Cr.PC and the procedure u/s.340 Cr.PC beingmandatory could not be circumvented – In a counter-affidavit tothe revision application, the appellants for the first time took theplea that offences u/ss.463, 464, 465, 467, 468, 469, 471, 474,475 and 477-A of the IPC were also made out against therespondents, as a result of which a private complaint would bemaintainable – The Additional Sessions Judge allowed the revisionand quashed the complaints – Writ petitions filed by the appellantswere dismissed by the High Court – On appeal, held: Iqbal SinghMarwah case is clear authority for the proposition that in caseswhich fall u/s.195(1)(b)(ii) of the Cr.PC, the document that is saidto have been forged should be custodia legis after which the forgerytakes place – Further, various judgments of the Supreme Court alsolay down that when s.195(1)(b)(i) of the Cr.PC is attracted, the ratioof Iqbal Singh Marwah case is not attracted and that therefore, iffalse evidence is created outside the Court premises attracting ss.191/192 of the IPC, the aforesaid ratio would not apply so as to validatea private complaint filed for offences made out under these sections– A perusal of the complaints filed in the instant case, leaves nomanner of doubt that the first complaint attracts the provisions ofs.191 of the IPC and the second complaint attracts the provisionsof s.192 of the IPC – The debit notes that are said to be created bythe respondents, it is clear that the debit notes were not ‘falsedocuments’ u/s.464 IPC, inasmuch they had not been made with theintention of causing it to be believed that they were made by orunder the authority of some other person – Since this basic ingredientof forgery itself is not made out, none of the sections that are soughtto be relied upon in chapter XVIII of the IPC can thus said to beeven prima facie attracted in the facts of the present case – Thefacts clearly show that the two complaints correctly invoked s.195r/w. s.340 of the Cr.PC and were then sought to be converted intoprivate complaints thereby attempting to fix a square peg in a roundrole – This has correctly been interdicted by the Sessions Court inrevision and by the High Court under appeal – While it is correct tosay that the order of conversion and issuing of process thereafteron a private complaint may not be correct, yet the two complaintsas originally filed can still be pursued – Therefore, the twocomplaints reinstated in their original form so that they may beproceeded further, following the drill of s.195 and s.340 of Cr.PC. |
Judge | Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.F. Nariman |
Neutral Citation | 2020 INSC 531 |
Petitioner | M/s Bandekar Brothers Pvt. Ltd. & Anr |
Respondent | Prasad Vassudev Keni, Etc. Etc |
SCR | [2020] 10 S.C.R. 1075 |
Judgement Date | 2020-09-02 |
Case Number | 546 |
National Digital Library of India (NDLI) is a virtual repository of learning resources which is not just a repository with search/browse facilities but provides a host of services for the learner community. It is sponsored and mentored by Ministry of Education, Government of India, through its National Mission on Education through Information and Communication Technology (NMEICT). Filtered and federated searching is employed to facilitate focused searching so that learners can find the right resource with least effort and in minimum time. NDLI provides user group-specific services such as Examination Preparatory for School and College students and job aspirants. Services for Researchers and general learners are also provided. NDLI is designed to hold content of any language and provides interface support for 10 most widely used Indian languages. It is built to provide support for all academic levels including researchers and life-long learners, all disciplines, all popular forms of access devices and differently-abled learners. It is designed to enable people to learn and prepare from best practices from all over the world and to facilitate researchers to perform inter-linked exploration from multiple sources. It is developed, operated and maintained from Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur.
Learn more about this project from here.
NDLI is a conglomeration of freely available or institutionally contributed or donated or publisher managed contents. Almost all these contents are hosted and accessed from respective sources. The responsibility for authenticity, relevance, completeness, accuracy, reliability and suitability of these contents rests with the respective organization and NDLI has no responsibility or liability for these. Every effort is made to keep the NDLI portal up and running smoothly unless there are some unavoidable technical issues.
Ministry of Education, through its National Mission on Education through Information and Communication Technology (NMEICT), has sponsored and funded the National Digital Library of India (NDLI) project.
Sl. | Authority | Responsibilities | Communication Details |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education |
Sanctioning Authority | https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives |
2 | Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur | Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project | https://www.iitkgp.ac.in |
3 | National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur | The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project | Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in |
4 | Project PI / Joint PI | Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project |
Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon |
5 | Website/Portal (Helpdesk) | Queries regarding NDLI and its services | support@ndl.gov.in |
6 | Contents and Copyright Issues | Queries related to content curation and copyright issues | content@ndl.gov.in |
7 | National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club) | Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach | clubsupport@ndl.gov.in |
8 | Digital Preservation Centre (DPC) | Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books | dpc@ndl.gov.in |
9 | IDR Setup or Support | Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops | idr@ndl.gov.in |