S.313--Examination of accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C.--Object--Is to enable accused personally to explain any circumstances appearing in evidence against him--A circumstance about which accused had not been asked to explain cannot be used against him.; Niku v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 790
S.313--Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, S.15--Contraband--Acquittal--Recovery of 5 bags of poppy husk each containing 30 kgs.--Affidavits of carrier of sample parcels as well as MHC with whom case property was deposited was not put to accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C.--Cannot be looked into evidence against him--Link evidence is missing--Appellant acquitted.; Niku v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 790
S.378(4)--Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138--Appeal against acquittal--Leave to file--Dishonour of Cheque--Security Cheque--There was no legal liability at time of issuance of cheque by accused in favour of complainant--Cheque given as security to get sale deed executed--Accused is not liable under provisions of Section 138 of N.I. Act--Trial Court given sound reasons while acquitting accused--No ground made out to grant leave to file an appeal against acquittal.; Satinder Kumar v. Gurvinder Singh, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 724
S.439--Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.302, 201, 120-B & 34--Bail--Murder--First version by way of DDR does not implicate anybody--FIR lodged after delay of 10 days--Extra judicial confession made by petitioner, wife of deceased after 7 months of lodging FIR--Two of accused left out by prosecution from array of accused--As per medico legal report deceased used to consumption of heavy quantity of alcohol--No definite opinion in regard to any homicidal act--None of witnesses recorded--Bail granted.; Sanjay & Gandhi v. State of Haryana, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 760
S.439--Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.302, 307, 323, 148, 149, 120-B--Arms Act,1959 S.25 & 27--Bail--Murder--Attempt to murder--Petitioners not attributed any role in FIR--However in statement before trial Court they have alleged to have armed with weapon--But no injury caused by them--Keeping in view role attributed to petitioners in occurrence and fact that they have been in custody for last one year and two months and also that trial in the case is likely to take time it would be just expedient to grant concession of bail.; Harphool Singh v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 736
S.482--Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.323/506--Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, S.3(1)(x) (xi)--Quashing of complaint--Allegations of commission of offence under S.C. and S.T. are not made out--Complaint filed not for reason that petitioner has committed an offence rather with some ulterior motive--There was some dispute in regard to path--Both sides were trying to take possession of that path--In malafide exercise Criminal complaint filed so as to pressurize petitioner in matter of possession of the path--This is when on repeated complaints and three enquiries investigation agency concluded that no offence under S.C. and S.T. Act had been committed--Factum of conclusion drawn by police authorities or enquires intentionally not disclosed in complaint--In such circumstance, continuance of these proceedings shall result in abuse of process of Court--Complaint quashed.; Dilbagh Singh & Ors. v. Sukhjinder Kaur, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 729
S.482--Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.420, 467, 468, 471 & 120-B--Quashing--Cheating--Allegation that accused no. 1 to 6 in collusion with each other got sale deed executed and registered in favour of accused no.2 in regard to land that had already gifted to complainant and her son by her father-in-law--Accused no.2 witnessed sale deeds although he was in full knowledge of gift deeds since time of their execution and registration--Considering nature of allegations, while exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. evidence cannot be taken by way of affidavit to disprove facts alleged in complaint--Petitioner would have right to lead evidence in defence to negate allegations--In view of disputed facts no grounds for quashing impugned complaint and summoning order made out.; Paramjit Singh v. State Of Punjab & Anr., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 746
