web analytics

Menu

Skip to content
Shades of Knife
  • Home
  • True Colors of a Vile Wife
  • Need Inspiration?
  • Blog Updates
  • SOK Gallery
  • Vile News Reporter
  • About Me
  • Contact Me

Shades of Knife

True Colors of a Vile Wife

Month: July 2018

Asit Bhattacharjee Vs MS. Hanuman Prasad Ojha & Ors on 15 May, 2007

Posted on July 15, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

In this judgment by Hon’ble Apex Court, it is held that,

The necessary ingredients for proving a criminal offence must exist in a complaint petition. Such ingredients of offence must be referable to the places where the cause of action in regard to commission of offence has arisen. A cause of action as understood in its ordinary parlance may be relevant for exercise of jurisdiction under Clause (2) of Article 226 of the Constitution of India but its definition stricto sensu may not be applicable for the purpose of bringing home a charge of criminal offence. The application filed by the appellant under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure disclosed commission of a large number of offences.

 

Asit Bhattacharjee Vs MS. Hanuman Prasad Ojha & Ors on 15 May, 2007
Posted in Supreme Court of India Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged Asit Bhattacharjee Vs MS. Hanuman Prasad Ojha and Ors Territorial Jurisdiction | Leave a comment

Fareed Ahmed Qureshi Vs State of Maharashtra on 7 March, 2018

Posted on July 14, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

An order for inquiry for perjury was passed by Hon’ble Bombay High Court under section 340 of Cr.P.C against offences under sections 193, 196, 199, 200 and 209 of IPC.

Fareed Ahmed Qureshi Vs State of Maharashtra on 7 March, 2018

 

This Order was set aside by Apex Court here.

Posted in High Court of Bombay Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged CrPC 340 read with CrPC 195 Perjury - Approached Court with Unclean Hands Perjury Under Section 340 CrPC | Leave a comment

Naresh Kavarchand Khatri Vs State Of Gujarat & Anr on 8 May, 2008

Posted on July 14, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat has passed an order to transfer a case from Vadodara to another police station having territorial jurisdiction or to CID Crime or any other independent agency. This without the notice to/knowledge of the original complainant. Read on.

From Para 5,

The informant was not impleaded as a party therein. No notice was issued on the said appeals. No reason has been assigned. The Court did not advert to the question as to whether it had any jurisdiction to pass the said order. Why such a concession was made by the learned APP on the very first day of hearing is not known.

….

The Court should not interfere in the matter at an initial stage in regard thereto. If it is found that the investigation has been conducted by an Investigating Officer who did not have any territorial jurisdiction in the matter, the same should be transferred by him to the police station having the requisite jurisdiction.

From Para 6,

It is of some significance that the High Court exercised its jurisdiction even without notice to the petitioner. The investigation has to be carried out on the basis of the allegations made. The first informant is required to be examined; statements of his witnesses were required to be taken; the accused were also required to be interrogated.

The undue haste with which the High Court has exercised its jurisdiction, in our opinion, should not be encouraged.

Finally,

We, therefore, are of the opinion that it is not a case where we should refuse to exercise jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. We, therefore, set aside the impugned orders. Consequently, the charge sheets filed by the Wagodhia Police Station stand set aside. The concerned Police Officer of Vadodara Police Station would initiate appropriate investigation in the matter in accordance with law.

Naresh Kavarchand Khatri Vs State Of Gujarat & Anr on 8 May, 2008
Posted in Supreme Court of India Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged FIR Transfer Set Aside Naresh Kavarchand Khatri Vs State Of Gujarat and Anr | Leave a comment

Aaisha Uttarwar Vs State of Chhattisgarh on 29 April, 2016

Posted on July 14, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

Peculiar case here. A writ petition is filed seeking to challenge the transfer of a zero FIR registered from a PS in Chhattisgarh to a PS in Telangana.

Case Brief:

  1. Marriage happened at Bilaspur.
  2. Alleged instances of dowry-related cruelty happened at Secunderabad.
  3. Due to this cruelty Knife goes back to parent’s home and files 498A case at Bilaspur.
  4. Complaint is turned into a zero FIR at Bilaspur.
  5. After preliminary inquiry/examination, SP of Bilaspur transferred the case to Alwal PS through DSP Secunderabad for further investigation holding that the place of occurrence falls within the territorial jurisdiction of Police Station Alwal.

Argument made is that the Officer In-charge of the police station was obliged to investigate the offence completely and without completion of the investigation, it was not within the jurisdiction of the Superintendent of Police, to transfer the F.I.R./case diary to the Police Station Alwal, District Secunderabad (Telangana) for further investigation and therefore, the order of transfer of F.I.R./case diary to the Police Station Alwal, District Secunderabad (Telangana) is unsustainable in law and therefore, order dated 09/07/2015 passed by Superintendent of Police be set-aside and Station House Officer, Police Station Tarbahar Bilaspur be directed to investigate the offence completely and respondent No. 2 be directed to send back the case diary back to Police Station Tarbahar Bilaspur for investigation of the matter.

Finally,

As the offence under Section 498-A of the IPC being cognizable, the Station House Officer, Tarbahar Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) was obliged to investigate the said offence completely by virtue of provisions contained in Section 156(1) of the Cr.P.C., and unless, the investigation of said crime is completed fully as per procedure laid down in Cr.P.C., F.I.R. could not have been directed to be transferred and such a direction is contrary to law laid down by Their Lordships of Supreme Court in Satvinder Kaur (supra).

Aaisha Uttarwar Vs State of Chhattisgarh on 29 April, 2016
Posted in High Court of Chhattisgarh Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged Aaisha Uttarwar Vs State of Chhattisgarh FIR Transfer Set Aside Transfer of Criminal Case Zero FIR to be Filed Investigated and Transferred | Leave a comment

Ramesh Kumari Vs State (N.C.T. Of Delhi) And Ors on 21 February, 2006

Posted on July 14, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

This is another judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court, wherein it is held FIR has to be mandatorily registered for every Cognizable Offence reported in a Police Station. If the accused is a police official, CBI can file case and investigate it.

 

Ramesh Kumari vs State (N.C.T. Of Delhi) And Ors on 21 February, 2006
Posted in Supreme Court of India Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged CrPC 154 - Information in Cognizable Cases Ramesh Kumari Vs State (N.C.T. Of Delhi) And Ors | Leave a comment

Krishna Veni Nagam Vs Harish Nagam on 9 March, 2017

Posted on July 13, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

In just judgment, Hon’ble Apex Court held that

in matrimonial or custody matters or in proceedings between parties to a marriage or arising out of disputes between parties to a marriage, wherever the defendants/respondents are located outside the jurisdiction of the court, the court where proceedings are instituted, may examine whether it is in the interest of justice to incorporate any safeguards for ensuring that summoning of defendant/respondent does not result in denial of justice. Order incorporating such safeguards may be sent along with the summons.
The safeguards can be:-
i) Availability of video conferencing facility.
ii) Availability of legal aid service.
iii) Deposit of cost for travel, lodging and boarding in terms of Order XXV CPC.
iv) E-mail address/phone number,

Krishna Veni Nagam Vs. Harish Nagam on 9 March, 2017

Citations : [2017 SCC 4 150], [2017 SCC ONLINE SC 236], [2017 AIR SC 1345], [2017 CTC 2 457], [2017 CDR SC 2 202], [2017 AJR 2 462], [2017 ALR 122 905], [2017 ALT 5 4], [2017 ALD 3 151], [2017 BOMCR 3 62], [2017 CLT 123 1054], [2017 DMCSC 2 173], [2017 GLT 2 29], [2017 JKJ SC 2 35], [2017 KHC 2 380], [2017 KLJ 2 549], [2017 KLT 2 593], [2017 LW 3 721], [2017 MPLJ 3 344], [2017 MHLJ 4 764], [2017 OLR 1 1033], [2017 RCR CIVIL 2 358], [2017 SCALE 3 471], [2017 SCJ 6 392], [2017 WBLR SC 3 622], [2017 WLN SC 2 26], [2017 SCC CIV 2 394]

Other Sources:

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/43287493/

https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/58ca392a2713e10674449271


This judgment is overruled in Santhini Vs Vijaya Venketesh here.

Posted in Supreme Court of India Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged 2-Judge (Division) Bench Decision Issued or Recommended Guidelines or Directions or Protocols to be followed Krishna Veni Nagam Vs. Harish Nagam Overruled Judgment Reportable Judgement or Order Transfer Petition Use Technology For Justice | Leave a comment

Santhini Vs Vijaya Venkatesh on 9 October, 2017

Posted on July 13, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

Justice Dipak Misra has issued guidelines in the usage of video conferencing especially in matrimonial cases in the interests of Justice and to avoid delays.

Santhini Vs Vijaya Venkatesh on 9 October, 2017

Citations: [2017 BOMCR 6 315], [2017 CTC 6 81], [2017 KHC 5 48], [2017 KLT 4 415], [2017 RCR CIVIL 4 623], [2017 SCALE 12 359], [2018 SCC 1 1], [2017 SCC ONLINE SC 1202], [2017 INSC 1023]

Other Sources:

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/184536583/

https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/59dbc07bce686e237b6a89fc

Posted in Supreme Court of India Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged 3-Judge (Full) Bench Decision Santhini Vs Vijaya Venkatesh Transfer Petition Use Technology For Justice | Leave a comment

Bimla Rawal Vs. State on 1 January, 2008

Posted on July 13, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

Another FIR transfer instead of FIR quash judgment from Hon’ble Delhi High Court

 

Bimla Rawal Vs. State on 1 January, 2008
Posted in High Court of Delhi Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged Bimla Rawal Vs. State FIR Transferred Instead Of Quash On Jurisdiction | Leave a comment

State of Andhra Pradesh Vs Bajjoori Kanthaiah and Anr on 20 October, 2008

Posted on July 13, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that

From Para 9,

In all these cases there was either statements of witnesses or seizure of black jaggery and olum materials being used for manufacturing illicit distilled liquor which factors cannot be said to be without relevance. Whether the material already in existence or to be collected during investigation would be sufficient for holding the concerned accused persons guilty has to be considered at the time of trial. At the time of framing the charge it can be decided whether prima facie case has been made out showing commission of an offence and involvement of the charged persons. At that stage also evidence cannot be gone into meticulously. It is immaterial whether the case is based on direct or circumstantial evidence. Charge can be framed, if there are materials showing possibility about the commission of the crime as against certainty. That being so, the interference at the threshold with the F.I.R. is to be in very exceptional circumstances as held in R.P. Kapoor and Bhajan Lal cases (supra).

From Para 10,

Ultimately, the acceptability of the materials to fasten culpability on the accused persons is a matter of trial. These are not the cases where it can be said that the FIR did not disclose commission of an offence. Therefore, the High Court was not justified in quashing the FIR in the concerned cases.

 

State of Andhra Pradesh Vs Bajjoori Kanthaiah and Anr on 20 October, 2008
Posted in Supreme Court of India Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged FIR Quash Set Aside State of Andhra Pradesh Vs Bajjoori Kanthaiah and Anr | Leave a comment

Niraj Trivedi Vs State on 4 January, 2008

Posted on July 13, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

Another of Shri justice Shiv Narayan Dhingra’s awesome judgments from Hon’ble Delhi High Court. If no cause of action occurred in the jurisdiction of a police, the police may register the case but should transfer the case to the police station with correct jurisdiction.

 

Niraj Trivedi Vs State on 4 January, 2008
Posted in High Court of Delhi Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged FIR Transferred Instead Of Quash On Jurisdiction Justice Shiv Narayan Dhingra Niraj Trivedi Vs State | Leave a comment

Post navigation

  • Older posts
  • Newer posts

Search within entire Content of “Shades of Knife”

My Legal X Timeline

Advocate Sandeep Pamarati 🇮🇳💪👨🏻‍🎓 Follow

AP High Court Advocate with M Tech (CS) || 12 years in 'Software Industry' as Solution Architect || Blogs at https://t.co/29CB9BzK4w || #TDPTwitter

SandeepPamarati
Retweet on Twitter Advocate Sandeep Pamarati 🇮🇳💪👨🏻‍🎓 Retweeted
kanekoathegreat KanekoaTheGreat @kanekoathegreat ·
2 Aug

RFK Jr. blasts CNN's Dana Bash over COVID:

BASH: "You're the HHS security and you're leading to vaccine hesitancy."

KENNEDY: "Do you see your job as ending vaccine hesitancy or telling the truth?"

BASH: "The truth is that there is study after study."

KENNEDY: "You're

Reply on Twitter 2084032302464860218 Retweet on Twitter 2084032302464860218 2081 Like on Twitter 2084032302464860218 9508 X 2084032302464860218
Retweet on Twitter Advocate Sandeep Pamarati 🇮🇳💪👨🏻‍🎓 Retweeted
capitallens_ Pratham @capitallens_ ·
3 Aug

Reality Check 🤐

A men tested 1 batch of Everest Garam Masala in lab costing ₹28,000.

After testing, the results that came will shock you:

Azoxystrobin (Pesticide used in Masala):

Limit~ 0.1 mg/kg
Actual~ 0.200 mg/kg
Difference~ 2x

Means according to FSSAI standards limits

Reply on Twitter 2084166590602563711 Retweet on Twitter 2084166590602563711 553 Like on Twitter 2084166590602563711 1825 X 2084166590602563711
Retweet on Twitter Advocate Sandeep Pamarati 🇮🇳💪👨🏻‍🎓 Retweeted
sailu_jsp Sailu🦚 @sailu_jsp ·
3 Aug

అదే Kalyan గారు అధికారంలోకి వచ్చిన 24 నెలలలో ఈ కళాకారుల కోసం ప్రత్యేకంగా "WoodBanks" ఏర్పాటుచేశారు👏🏻🙏🏻

"మీ దయ వలన అంకుడు కర్రకు ఐతే ఎటువంటి ఇబ్బంది లేకుండా అయ్యింది Sir '"🙏🏻😊

:- AP హస్తకళా ప్రదర్శన మహోత్సవంలో

మన Hon'ble @APDeputyCMO శ్రీ @PawanKalyan గారితో కళాకారులు ❣️

Reply on Twitter 2084209810027979069 Retweet on Twitter 2084209810027979069 75 Like on Twitter 2084209810027979069 218 X 2084209810027979069
Retweet on Twitter Advocate Sandeep Pamarati 🇮🇳💪👨🏻‍🎓 Retweeted
hunterxtwt hunter @hunterxtwt ·
2 Aug

Reply on Twitter 2083781294614573423 Retweet on Twitter 2083781294614573423 1454 Like on Twitter 2083781294614573423 27719 X 2083781294614573423
Load More

Recent Posts

  • Ishwar Chand Sharma and Ors Vs State of U.P. on 29 May 2026 July 26, 2026
  • Prabhakar Yeshwant Masram and Anr Vs Sou Tula Namdeorao Jaipurkar and Anr on 21 Jul 2026 July 26, 2026
  • Shikha Lall Vs Prince Agarwal on 7 Nov 2024 July 21, 2026
  • Pranjal Poddar and Ors Vs Shivani Gupta on 21 Apr 2026 July 21, 2026
  • Sharad Kumar Pandey Vs Mamta Pandey on 1 Sep 2010 July 21, 2026

Most Read Posts

  • Reply to Section 41A CrPC Notice – Format with Legal Explanation (5,146 views)
  • Charge Sheet and Final Report Explained (3,174 views)
  • Regular Bail Application Format (Section 437/439 CrPC) (2,550 views)
  • Arrest Procedure in 498A cases after Arnesh Kumar (2,149 views)
  • Discharge Application Format in 498A Case – Draft, Procedure & Sample Template (2,089 views)
  • Can You Travel Abroad After an FIR Is Registered? – Legal Position Explained (2,057 views)
  • Life Cycle of a Perjury Case (2,032 views)
  • Application for Certified Copy of FIR – Format, Procedure and Sample Draft (1,775 views)
  • Appeal, Revision and Review Explained (1,745 views)
  • Life Cycle Stages of a Restitution of Conjugal Rights Case (1,706 views)

Tags

Reportable Judgement or Order (439)2-Judge (Division) Bench Decision (424)Legal Procedure Explained - Interpretation of Statutes (387)Landmark Case (384)1-Judge Bench Decision (370)Catena of Landmark Judgments Referred/Cited to (298)Work-In-Progress Article (215)3-Judge (Full) Bench Decision (101)Sandeep Pamarati (91)Article 21 - Protection of life and personal liberty (80)Issued or Recommended Guidelines or Directions or Protocols to be followed (71)Perjury Under Section 340 CrPC (70)Absurd Or After Thought Or Baseless Or False Or General Or Inherently Improbable Or Improved Or UnSpecific Or Omnibus Or Vague Allegations (62)Reprimands or Setbacks to YCP Govt of Andhra Pradesh (49)Summary Post (47)CrPC 482 - Quash (44)CrPC 125 or BNSS 144 - Order for Maintenance of Wives Children and Parents (43)HM Act Sec 13 - Divorce Granted to Husband (42)Abuse Or Misuse of Process of Court (42)Divorce Granted on Cruelty ground (42)

Categories

Supreme Court of India Judgment or Order or Notification (760)Bare Acts or State Amendments or Statutes or GOs or Notifications issued by Central or State Governments (329)High Court of Andhra Pradesh Judgment or Order or Notification (187)High Court of Delhi Judgment or Order or Notification (167)High Court of Bombay Judgment or Order or Notification (112)High Court of Karnataka Judgment or Order or Notification (95)Legal Procedure (83)High Court of Madras Judgment or Order or Notification (71)High Court of Allahabad Judgment or Order or Notification (63)LLB Study Material (59)General Study Material (56)High Court of Punjab & Haryana Judgment or Order or Notification (53)Assorted Court Judgments or Orders or Notifications (51)High Court of Kerala Judgment or Order or Notification (47)Judicial Activism (for Public Benefit) (47)Prakasam DV Cases (46)District or Sessions or Magistrate Court Judgment or Order or Notification (44)High Court of Madhya Pradesh Judgment or Order or Notification (38)High Court of Gujarat Judgment or Order or Notification (28)High Court of Telangana Judgment or Order or Notification (28)

Recent Comments

  • vinod gupta on Reply to Section 41A CrPC Notice – Format with Legal Explanation
  • eCourts India on Compromise-Based Quashing in Matrimonial Cases – Complete Legal Strategy
  • The Divorce Law Firm on Life Cycle Stages of a Divorce case
  • The Divorce Law Firm on Life Cycle Stages of a Divorce case
  • ShadesOfKnife on Sandeep Pamarati Vs Ungrateful Knife (IPC 498A Case)

Archives of SoK

  • July 2026 (19)
  • June 2026 (19)
  • May 2026 (24)
  • April 2026 (33)
  • March 2026 (42)
  • February 2026 (30)
  • January 2026 (21)
  • December 2025 (2)
  • November 2025 (3)
  • October 2025 (17)
  • September 2025 (12)
  • August 2025 (5)
  • July 2025 (10)
  • June 2025 (15)
  • May 2025 (3)
  • April 2025 (10)
  • March 2025 (7)
  • February 2025 (8)
  • January 2025 (1)
  • December 2024 (3)
  • November 2024 (4)
  • October 2024 (16)
  • September 2024 (15)
  • August 2024 (14)
  • July 2024 (11)
  • June 2024 (18)
  • May 2024 (13)
  • April 2024 (9)
  • March 2024 (23)
  • February 2024 (15)
  • January 2024 (11)
  • December 2023 (11)
  • November 2023 (9)
  • October 2023 (13)
  • September 2023 (12)
  • August 2023 (15)
  • July 2023 (17)
  • June 2023 (11)
  • May 2023 (6)
  • April 2023 (5)
  • March 2023 (10)
  • February 2023 (9)
  • January 2023 (12)
  • December 2022 (12)
  • November 2022 (8)
  • October 2022 (13)
  • September 2022 (17)
  • August 2022 (10)
  • July 2022 (21)
  • June 2022 (27)
  • May 2022 (23)
  • April 2022 (32)
  • March 2022 (17)
  • February 2022 (6)
  • January 2022 (2)
  • December 2021 (7)
  • November 2021 (7)
  • October 2021 (6)
  • September 2021 (10)
  • August 2021 (31)
  • July 2021 (45)
  • June 2021 (17)
  • May 2021 (17)
  • April 2021 (18)
  • March 2021 (58)
  • February 2021 (14)
  • January 2021 (50)
  • December 2020 (35)
  • November 2020 (68)
  • October 2020 (67)
  • September 2020 (28)
  • August 2020 (41)
  • July 2020 (20)
  • June 2020 (36)
  • May 2020 (40)
  • April 2020 (38)
  • March 2020 (26)
  • February 2020 (43)
  • January 2020 (35)
  • December 2019 (34)
  • November 2019 (4)
  • October 2019 (18)
  • September 2019 (57)
  • August 2019 (33)
  • July 2019 (12)
  • June 2019 (18)
  • May 2019 (5)
  • April 2019 (19)
  • March 2019 (58)
  • February 2019 (11)
  • January 2019 (90)
  • December 2018 (97)
  • November 2018 (43)
  • October 2018 (31)
  • September 2018 (73)
  • August 2018 (47)
  • July 2018 (143)
  • June 2018 (92)
  • May 2018 (97)
  • April 2018 (59)
  • March 2018 (8)

Blogroll

  • Daaman Promoting Harmony 0
  • Fight against Legal Terrorism Fight against Legal Terrorism along with MyNation Foundation 0
  • Good Morning Good Morning News 0
  • Insaaf India Insaaf Awareness Movement 0
  • MyNation Hope Foundation Wiki 0
  • MyNation.net Equality, Justice and Harmony 0
  • Sarvepalli Legal 0
  • Save Indian Family Save Indian Family Movement 0
  • SIF Chandigarh SIF Chandigarh 0
  • The Male Factor The Male Factor 0
  • Unitedmen Foundation a dedicated community forged with the mission to unite men facing legal challenges in marital disputes. 0
  • Vaastav Foundation The Social Reality 0
  • Vinayak my2centsworth – This blog is for honest law abiding men, married or planning to get married 0
  • Voice4india Indian Laws, Non-profits, Environment 0
  • Writing Law Writing Law by Ankur 0

RSS Cloudflare Status

  • EWR (Newark) on 2026-09-02 September 2, 2026
    THIS IS A SCHEDULED EVENT Sep 2, 05:00 - 09:00 UTC Jul 21, 15:30 UTC Scheduled - We will be performing scheduled maintenance in EWR (Newark) datacenter on 2026-09-02 between 05:00 and 09:00 UTC.Traffic might be re-routed from this location, hence there is a possibility of a slight increase in latency during this maintenance window […]
    Cloudflare

RSS List of Spam Server IPs from Project Honeypot

  • 141.98.84.74 | SD August 3, 2026
    Event: Bad Event | Total: 254 | First: 2026-07-13 | Last: 2026-08-03
Owned and Operated by Advocate Sandeep Pamarati and Advocate Suprajaa Rajan
Proudly powered by WordPress
Theme: Flint by Star Verte LLC

Bad Behavior has blocked 481 access attempts in the last 7 days.

pixel