9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 576X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... int accompanied by an affidavit - the case of Mrs. Priyanka Srivastava and another vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others [2015 (5) TMI 47 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] referred - Held that: - The said direction issued in the above said judgment was in the context of a complainant who had filed prior application under Sections 154(1) and 154(3) while filing a petition under Section 156(3) should be ind ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gde and Shri. K. Manjunath, Advocates For the Respondent : Smt. Geetha C and Shri. N.R. Bhaskar, Advocates ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. This petition is filed in the following circumstances. The complaint was filed against the petitioner under Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code for the offence punishable under Sections 9(1)(b), 9(1)(bb) and 9(1)(bbb) an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petition and has remanded the matter to the Magistrate to proceed in accordance with law from the stage of framing of charges and it is that which is under challenge in this petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that there was no valid sanction obtained in initiating prosecution. However, there is no provision of law under which such sanction was mandatory and hence the sai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der Section 154 does not arise in the present case on hand as the complaint was filed under Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Secondly, the offences alleged are non-cognizable as found from the provisions of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Therefore, the mandate as found in Srivastava's case would not apply to the present case on hand. Consequently, the petition fails and is rejecte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
