9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
Petition under Section 482 Cr. P.C. for quashing Complaint, summoning order, and subsequent proceedings. Summary: Issue 1: Jurisdiction and maintainability of the petition The petitioner filed a petition under Section 482 Cr. P.C. to quash the complaint, summoning order, and subsequent proceedings, claiming abuse of process of the Court. The petitioner's attorney argued that the complaint should have been filed in Dubai where the alleged offences took place. The respondent's counsel contended that the petition filed through the attorney was not maintainable. The Court held that only the accused person can file a petition under Section 482 Cr. P.C. for quashing proceedings, and not a third party. Citing legal precedents, the Court emphasized that the petitioner, being the accused, should challenge the proceedings himself unless suffering from a recognized disability. The Court dismissed the petition as not maintainable through the attorney. Key Points: - The complaint was filed against the petitioner and co-petitioners in Indian courts, while the petitioner resided in Dubai. - Legal precedents highlighted that only the accused can file a petition under Section 482 Cr. P.C. for quashing proceedings. - The Court emphasized that a third party cannot fight a proxy war on behalf of the accused in criminal cases. - The petition filed through the attorney was deemed not maintainable, and the Court dismissed it. Significant Phrases: - Abuse of process of the Court - Jurisdictional issue - Maintainability of the petition - Legal precedents - Proxy war in legal proceedings Additional Comments: The Court's decision was based on the principle that only the accused individual can challenge criminal proceedings, and not a third party acting on their behalf. The dismissal of the petition through the attorney reaffirmed the requirement for the accused to directly address legal matters concerning them in criminal cases.
|
