rajesh
24 June 2015 at 19:22
She filed 498a now police can turn it out to 493a
suresh bhogle
18 June 2015 at 10:51
Hello members,
As per news cheque bouncing ordinance passed. President okayed it. can we now file case at a place where cheque was presented say tomorrow. Or how much time will take to actually enable the litigants to avail of the benefit of the Ordinance?
Thank you very much
Rakesh
13 June 2015 at 17:34
A Court case is going on against me under IPC 504 506 in Agra, UP
Actually, I gave some money to one of my friend but instead of returning it back, he filed the above case. I have full proofs that i gave that money to him.
I know he cannot prove any violence as Actually i did not do anything wrong to him ever.
Now Can i too filed a case against him for extortion?
Will it be accepted or rejected due to counter attack?
Dr.B.Ravi Kumar
11 June 2015 at 07:31
The merit of the case is the death of a 24 year old lactating lady with an one year old child. The gynecologist(second accused) administered inj.Ampicillin for renal colic. This was not warranted. The final diagnosis of the gynecologist is pelvic inflammatory disease. But the gynecologist has not done a per vaginal examination which is the sheet anchor of the diagnosis of pelvic inflammatory disease. The test dose was not properly done and the total dose was administered. The patient started having breathlessness, HALLMARK of allergic reaction for which inj.Diazepam was given by duty doctor (first accused)who is 60 years old. The patient stopped breathing and the anesthetist came and intubated her. Then the anesthetist(third accused) ABANDONED the patient.
The patient was then referred to another hospital for ventilatory support. At that time a reference letter was given to the husband of the patient. The reference letter(evidence act 106) is silent about both injections Ampicillin and Diazepam. Subsequent conduct(evidence act 8) in the sense in consumer forum Kollam, State consumer forum Trivandrum, Sessions Court Kollam and High Court of Kerala they are silent about Inj.Diazepam.
The stay for the criminal case will expire on 30/6/15. They got the stay stating that they want to appeal before the Supreme Court.
The charge is under I.P.C. 304 Part(II) based on I.P.C. 299(3). This is because of the following explanation. Explanation 2.—Where death is caused by bodily injury, the person who causes such bodily injury shall be deemed to have caused the death, although by resorting to proper remedies and skillful treatment the death might have been prevented. But I feel it will come under I.P.C. 300(4) since the INTENTION was to hide the incompetence with FIRST degree KNOWLEDGE that DEATH is IMMINENT (with a high degree of probability which is only a mathematical proposition) if the antidote injection Adrenaline is not given. In this case POSSIBILITY(not probability of DEATH) is 100% if the antidote is not given because of CONCEALMENT of drug history.
Syed Ashfaque Ahmad
09 June 2015 at 17:09
DV and 498a have been registered after a 20 years of the marraige of NRI. DV case have been dismissed by lower court after full dress trial including Husband and family members.Discharge application of Husband rejected by Lower Court in case of 498a because at this stage document submitted by accused cannot be refer by the court. Now Husband has submitted his discharge application u/s 397 Cr.pc in session court.Family memberes of Husband have been discharged in 498a case by Session Judge u/s 397 cr.pc (239 cr.pc rejected by lower court)on the ground of Double jeoparady (Only one incidence DV & 498a have been registered on the one & only one FIR & same facts. I would be grateful if u can provide or advise legal suitable suggesdtion for discharge arguement. I am fightining a csae in person. For ur kind information Charges have been not framed yet by lower court. I had filed writ petion under Article 226 read with Cr.p.c 482 In High Court. Hc partly allowed the petition and advised to challenge u.s 227 cr.p.c. Please suggest legal solution
usa
06 June 2015 at 16:38
i have a crpc 107:151 ,adum check ,and rajinama in local police station against me .. is it any criminal record against me ? my neighbour family filed a case for beating against me in 2011 police booked me under crpc 107:151 i paid a bond of 500rs in sdm court the complainant also paid a bond , then nothing happen ,the lawyer told my father this case will be close in 6 months , one boy filed a report in police station against me for beating ,but he taken back his complaint immediataly ,3rd case is rajinama my neighbor family beat me recently , i had a rajinama with them in local police station .. i want to know is it any criminal recored against me? if i aplly for passport and visa is this cases bother me ?pls tell..
monty lamba
28 April 2015 at 16:31
आल एक्सपर्ट्स नमस्ते,
सर,
मेरा एक सिविल सूट फॉर डिक्लेरेशन , पोस्सेस्सिओं एंड इंजंक्शन 2012 से चल रहा है और 2014 में एक आदमी(लैटे प्रॉपर्टी सेलर का भाई ) ने एक U/o 1 R 10 CPC, की एप्लीकेशन दे कर पार्टी बनना चाहता है, बेसिस ऑफ़ फेक एंड फैब्रिकेटेड वसीयत डाक्यूमेंट्स के दवारा |
ये एप्लीकेशन सिविल कोर्ट साकेत नई डेल्ही में लगायी गयी थी |
मैने वसीयत की सर्टिफाइड कॉपी तथा लैटे प्रॉपर्टी सेलर के बैंक सैलरी अकाउंट में सिग्नेचर की सर्टिफाइड कॉपी ( एक अन्ने कंप्लेंट में कोर्ट में बैंक दवारा दिया गया था) का एक्सपर्ट ओपिओन कराया तो पाया दोनों सिग्नेचर डिफरेंस है |
मैने एक कंप्लेंट केस मेट्रोपॉलिटिन मजिस्टेड के पास U/s 156(3) फाइल कर दिया, मेट्रोपॉलिटिन मजिस्टेड ने स्टेटस रिपोर्ट कंसर्नेद पुलिस स्टेशन से कॉल किया जहाँ पर प्रॉपर्टी है |
सर,
पुलिस अफसर ने अपनी स्टेटस रिपोर्ट में सब बाते लिखने के बाद लिखा की क्युकी अक्सोउसेड ने वसीयत नामा एक सिविल सूट में साकेत कोर्ट में लगाया है इसलिए ये कंप्लेंट उनके पुलिस स्टेशन के जुडिशल के बहार का है इस लिए इसे साकेत पुलिस स्टेशन में ट्रांसफर करदेना चाइये |
अभी आर्गुमेंट के लिए दो महीने का टाइम है किर्पया आप बतये ये ठीक है या नहीं ?
क्या मुझे फिर से कम्पेंट फाइल करना पड़ेगा ? अगर नहीं तो कोई इस पर जजमेंट भेजे क्यों की पुलिस अफसर अकसर शॉर्टकट यूज़ करने के फ़िराक में रहते है | प्लीज हेल्प प्लीज हेल्प
WHATSAPP 91-8075113965
16 July 2014 at 09:32
SIRS,
I need your help sirs,
i am appearing in a 138 case for the accused.
Actually the accused is a Pvt Ltd Company.
so, the complainant has arrayed 4 persons as accused ......A1 is the company itself, in its official capacity....A2 is shown as "Director" of ....company.....A3 and A4 are two induviduals, shown as "cheif operating officer and executive vice president "....
in the complaint, it is avermed that A2 and A4 represented themselves as persons in charge of management of affairs of business and dealings.
No other document produced to prove this.. just a mere averment.
only A4 person signed the cheque.
case is that :
the was an oral business agreement between the accused and the complainant and the accused took 1 lakh as advance amount and subsequently failed to comply with the terms of the agreement. so the complainant
asked for the money he paid . the the accused gave a cheque , which subsequently
bounced. this is the case .
here, whether i can take the plea that cheque was taken as a security and hence 138 NI Act is not applicable, as per Bombay High court Citation ?
whether any witness is required for the payment of money in 138 cases ?
complaint has been filed against 4 accused , but, notice has been issued only against 3 persons .is it will vitiate the trial ?
( actually there are only 2 persons , other two persons are "legal persons"..ie, cheif operating officer" and "vice president. " )
these are the facts of the case ...
trial is fast approaching .....
so, please help me ....
PLEASE TELL ME WHAT ARE THE DEFENCES I CAN TAKE IN THIS CASE...
WHAT ARE THE POINTS I SHOULD HIGHLIGHT IN CROSS EXAMINATION OF THE COMPLAINANT ?
TELL ME APT CITATIONS ( PREFERABLY OF SUPREME COURT OR KERALA HIGH COURT ) SUITABLE FOR 138 CASE , AGAINST PVT LTD COMPANIES AND ITS DIRECTORS .....
THANKING YOU ALL IN ADVANCE , SIR, ....
SALIL KUMAR
ADVOCATE
THALASSERY
9447536929
9061435365
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Section 326,324,504 etc state case
In a criminal case filed by state of maharashtra in 2001 scheduled for the hearing in 2014.The jmfc court served the summons for the witness no 1/complainant in 2013. till today he is avoiding to appear in the court giving flimsy grounds and jmfc court is not taking any further steps for the same though requested several times. The court is also requested to call other witnesses to speed up and finish up the matter. In such case dismisal application is recomended or straight way approach high court under 384 for quashing the case?
Experts please advise.