Section  354 of IPC . Assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty .—Whoever assaults or uses criminal force to any woman, intending to outrage or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby outrage her modesty, shall be punished with impris­onment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Per Contra, learned APP has vehemently opposed the bail application by stating that the petitioner has been evading arrest and has not joined the investigation. He further alleged that the anticipatory bail application has been previously rejected by the learned ASJ keeping in view the seriousness of the allegations. Hence, the present petition is liable to be set aside. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. Before adverting to the quest...

  ” We have heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties at length. We have also considered the material on record. 4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties at length and considering the material on record, we are of the opinion that the criminal proceedings initiated by respondent No. 1 – original complainant is nothing but an abuse of the process of law for settling a civil dispute. 4.1 Even considering the nature of allegations in the complaint, we are of the firm opinion that no case is made out for taking cognizance of the offence under Section 420/34 IPC. The case involves a civil dispute and for settling a civil dispute, the criminal complaint has been filed, which is nothing but an abuse of the process of law.” —————————————————————————————————————————————–------------------------------ The Commissioner of Police & Ors. Vs. Devender Anand & Ors. [Criminal Appeal No. 834 of 2017] R. Shah, J. Feeling aggrieved and dissatis...

  Year of Professional Experience . More than 19 Years. PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATION Member of New Delhi Bar Association, New Delhi. Member of Delhi Bar Association ,Tis Hazari,Delhi. Member of Saket Bar Association, Saket, New Delhi. Member of Delhi High Court Bar Association,[DHCBA], New Delhi. About Practice Area of Adv. V.K.Singh Mr.  V .K.Singh is the founder member  of the firm, Law Office V.K.Singh (Law Offices). He has the vide expertise over the matters related to Criminal Laws Like Bails, Anticipatory Bail, Bails in ndps Act Cases, Cyber Crimes Cases, Dowry Cases u/s 498A-IPC Cases, Quashing Petition u/s 482 of Cr.P.C at Delhi High Court and others High Court, Criminal SLP and Appeals in Supreme Court, Criminal Defense Lawyer at Districts Courts,Fraud and Cheating Cases, DV Matters, Maintenance Revision Cases,Anti Corruption Cases, Prevention of Corruption Act Cases, Proclaimed Offender Cases,Quashing of FIR, Quashing of Chargesheet u/s 482 of Cr.P.C, Matters relate...

Section 42 in The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 1[42. Power of entry, search, seizure and arrest without warrant or authorisation. — (1) Any such officer (being an officer superior in rank to a peon, sepoy or constable) of the departments of central excise, narcotics, customs, revenue intellegence or any other department of the Central Government including para-military forces or armed forces as is empowered in this behalf by general or special order by the Central Government, or any such officer (being an officer superior in rank to a peon, sepoy or constable) of the revenue, drugs control, excise, police or any other department of a State Government as is empowered in this behalf by general or special order of the State Government, if he has reason to believe from persons knowledge or information given by any person and taken down in writing that any narcotic drug, or psychotropic substance, or controlled substance in respect of which an offence punishabl...

Section 67 in The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 67. Power to call for information, etc.—Any officer referred to in section 42 who is authorised in this behalf by the Central Government or a State Government may, during the course of any enquiry in connection with the contravention of any provisions of this Act,— (a) call for information from any person for the purpose of satisfying himself whether there has been any contravention of the provisions of this Act or any rule or order made thereunder; (b) require any person to produce or deliver any document or thing useful or relevant to the enquiry; (c) examine any person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case. Under the caption “Evidentiary value of statement under section 67 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, Act, 1985 (“NDPS Act”)”, the Court noted the decisions of Raj Kumar Karwal v. Union of India (1990) 2 SCC 409 and Kanhaiyalal v. Union of India (2008) 4 SCC 668, as ...

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd vs State of Maharashtra and others  held that : Whether the High Court would be justified in granting stay of further investigation pending the proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. before it and in what circumstances the High Court would be justified is a further core question to be considered. Before passing an interim order of staying further investigation pending the quashing petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and/or Article 41 226 of the Constitution of India, the High Court has to apply the very parameters which are required to be considered while quashing the proceedings in exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction, referred to hereinabove. 12. In a given case, there may be allegations of abuse of process of law by converting a civil dispute into a criminal dispute, only with a view to pressurise the accused. Similarly, in a given case the compla...