top of page
Unreasoned orders, does not disclose any application of mind to the case
Monu Vs State of UP and Anr
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.21 OF 2019 (Arising out of S.L.P.(CRL.) No. 10570 of 2018)
About/from the judgment:
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 482 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 420, 498A, 323, 376, 506 - Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 - Sections 3 and 4 - the Single Judge ought to have first set out the brief facts of the case with a view to understand the factual matrix and then should have examined the challenge made to the proceedings in the light of the principles of law on the question involved with a view to record the findings on the grounds urged by the appellant as to whether any case for interference therein is made out or not - the aforementioned exercise was not done by the High Court while passing an unreasoned impugned order, which does not disclose any application of mind to the case - unable to concur with such casual disposal of the application by the High Court and feel inclined to set aside the impugned order and remand the case to the High Court (Single Judge) with a request to decide the application afresh on merits in accordance with law keeping in view the aforementioned observations.
Read the Judgment
Knowledge and content of about almost all their respective descriptions are borrowed from law-related blogs and websites, we, therefore, wish to give proper credit to all the respective law-related blogs and websites like LiveLaw, Bar and Bench, LatestLaws, PathLegal, FirstLaw, Lawctopus, IndianKanoon, Manupatra, LegallyIndia etc.. Many of the judgments are also taken from them websites of Hon'ble Supreme Court and other respective Hon'ble High Courts!
Formats for use
bottom of page