Search Results for "authorized complaint"

1540 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 1540 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Bombay Acquits Peon in Prevention of Corruption Case Due to Unproved Demand and Doubtful Evidence. Conviction Under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Reversed as Complainant Admitted False Affidavit and Bribe Venue Changed Unexplainedly.

The appeal arose from a conviction by the Special Judge under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The appellant, a peon at the District Industrial...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Reserves Judgment on Petitions Challenging SEBI Show Cause Notices Alleging Lack of Jurisdiction and Res Judicata. Petitioners Argued Earlier Penalties Paid for Same Allegations Bar Fresh Notices Under SEBI Act and PFUTP Regulations.

These two writ petitions were heard together by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay challenging show cause notices issued by the Securities and Exc...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Unreliable Trap Witness and Lack of Corroboration. Demand and Acceptance of Bribe Not Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt Under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

The appellant, Devidas s/o Harichandra Bhaskar, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon on 26-11-2015 in Special (A.C.B.) Case No.13 o...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in Cheque Dishonour Case, Reverses Acquittal. The court held that the trial court erred in failing to apply the presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and that the accused failed to rebut the presumption.

The appellant, Doshi Brothers, a proprietary concern, filed a private complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, against M/s...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Industrial Court Order Directing Deposit of Gratuity in Termination Challenge — Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 Does Not Require Deposit of Gratuity Received as Condition for Adjudication of Termination Dispute

The petitioner, Sheikh Mehmood, was employed as a Typist with respondent Nos.1 and 2 (M/s Universal Medikit Private Ltd. and its Chairman) from 29 Jul...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition of Employee Challenging Industrial Court Order Directing Promotion of Qualified Employees with Retrospective Effect. Promotion of Unqualified Employee Set Aside as Unfair Labour Practice Under Items 5 and 9 of Schedule IV of MRTU & PULP Act.

The petitioner, Rama Khobragade, an employee of the Maharashtra Water Supply and Sewerage Board, challenged an order dated 14.07.1995 passed by the In...