https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397343 The High Court set aside the revisional court's order directing cognizance under Sections 420 and 120-B IPC against the petitioner-accused and Santosh Malviya. The court held that the revisional court exceeded its jurisdiction and that the trial court should have the discretion to assess the evidence and decide on framing charges. The complainant-respondent was advised to initiate separate proceedings under IPC if necessary. The criminal revision was allowed, and the impugned order was quashed. en-us Tue, 02 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 13 Aug 2020 18:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397343 The High Court set aside the revisional court's order directing cognizance under Sections 420 and 120-B IPC against the petitioner-accused and Santosh Malviya. The court held that the revisional court exceeded its jurisdiction and that the trial court should have the discretion to assess the evidence and decide on framing charges. The complainant-respondent was advised to initiate separate proceedings under IPC if necessary. The criminal revision was allowed, and the impugned order was quashed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 02 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397343