SC: Suit Alleging Coercion or Undue Influence Cannot be Rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC  ||  Cal HC: Once ED Attachment is Confirmed, Challenge Becomes Academic; PMLA Remedy Must be Pursued  ||  MP HC: Pen-Drive Evidence Cannot be Introduced At a Late Trial Stage Without Proof or Relevance  ||  Calcutta HC: Employee Can't be Stopped From Joining Rival Post-Resignation; Trade Secrets Protected  ||  Calcutta HC: Banks Must Provide Forensic Audit Report Before Calling an Account Fraudulent  ||  Del HC: Woman Cannot Demand Re-Entry to Abandoned Matrimonial Home if Alternate Accommodation Exists  ||  Calcutta HC: Land Acquisition For Industrial Park is Public Purpose; Leasing to Industry is Valid  ||  Patna HC: PwD Recruitment Must Comply With RPwD Act; Executive Resolutions Cannot Override the Law  ||  Madras HC: Individuals Facing Criminal Trial Must Get Court Permission Even to Renew Passports  ||  Calcutta HC: Demolition Orders Cannot be Challenged under Article 226 if a Statutory Appeal Exists    

J&K&L HC: Simultaneous Prosecution U/S 420 IPC & S.138 NI Act on Same Facts Not Double Jeopardy - (18 Jul 2022)

CRIMINAL

Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has held that two complaints under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) and under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act (NI Act), on same facts doesn’t amount to double jeopardy as ingredients for both offence are distinct from each other.

Tags : JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT   DOUBLE JEOPARDY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved