1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court Upholds Discharge Rejection, Emphasizes Legal Procedures and Trial Process</h1> The court upheld the rejection of the discharge application under Sections 504 and 506 I.P.C., emphasizing the importance of following legal procedures ... Maintainability of Discharge application - HELD THAT:- The jurisdiction of the trial court while exercising power under Section 245 Cr.P.C. is to look into the allegations made in the complaint, statement of witnesses and documentary evidence. The charges can be framed also on the basis of strong suspicion. Marshaling and appreciation of evidence is not within the domain of this Court to go into merits and demerits of the allegation simply because the applicant alleges malus animus against the complainant-opposite party no.2. This Court would also refrain from making imaginary journey in the realm of possible harassment which may have caused to the applicants on account of filing the complaint. Revision dismissed. Issues:1. Rejection of discharge application under Sections 504 and 506 I.P.C.2. Allegation of false complaint for pressurizing to release insurance money.3. Mechanical rejection of discharge application without proper reasoning.4. Prima facie case at the stage of summoning order.5. Jurisdiction of the trial court in framing charges.6. Appreciation of evidence at the stage of framing charges.7. Refraining from making assumptions about possible harassment.Analysis:1. The revision was filed against the rejection of the discharge application under Sections 504 and 506 I.P.C. The applicant argued that the complaint was false and aimed at pressurizing for insurance money release. The court noted that the discharge application was rejected without adequate reasoning, but it did not amount to a review of the summoning order.2. The applicant contended that no case was made out against them, and the complaint was false. The court observed that the summoning order was based on a prima facie case, and the applicant should have appeared before the court and filed a discharge application after the prosecution evidence was led.3. The court highlighted that the trial court's jurisdiction at the stage of framing charges is to consider the allegations, witness statements, and evidence, and charges can be framed based on strong suspicion. It emphasized that the court should not delve into the merits of the evidence at the charge-framing stage.4. Referring to previous judgments, the court reiterated that the trial court should not appreciate evidence at the stage of framing charges. It emphasized that the court cannot enter the realm of evidence appreciation during this stage and should focus on the allegations and witness statements.5. The court concluded by dismissing the revision, stating that it lacked merit. It emphasized refraining from assuming possible harassment faced by the applicant due to the complaint, highlighting the need to proceed with the trial to assess the truthfulness and sufficiency of evidence.Overall, the court upheld the rejection of the discharge application, emphasizing the importance of following the legal procedures and refraining from premature interference in the trial process.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
