SC: Under RTE Act, States Cannot Justify Low Teacher Pay by Citing Centre’s Failure to Release Funds  ||  Supreme Court: While a Child’s Welfare is Paramount, It is Not the Sole Factor in Custody Disputes  ||  Supreme Court: High Court Cannot Reject a Plaint While Exercising Jurisdiction under Article 227  ||  SC: Merely Leasing an Apartment Does Not Bar a Flat Buyer’s Consumer Complaint Against the Builder  ||  Delhi HC: Unproven Adultery Allegations Cannot be Used to Deny Interim Maintenance under the DV Act  ||  Bombay HC: Storing Items in a Fridge isn’t Manufacturing and Doesn’t Make Premises a Factory  ||  Kerala HC: Disability Pension is Not Payable if the Condition is Unrelated to Military Service  ||  Supreme Court: Award Valid Even If Passed After Mandate Expiry When Court Extends Time  ||  Jharkhand HC: Regular Bail Plea During Interim Bail is Not Maintainable under Section 483 BNSS  ||  Cal HC: Theft Claims and Public Humiliation Alone Don’t Amount To Abetment of Suicide U/S 306 IPC    

Raj HC: Judicial Officer Must Show Disagreement With Negative Final Report Before Taking Cognizance - (17 Apr 2023)

CRIMINAL

Rajasthan High Court has held that where a detailed negative final report is submitted it becomes imperative upon the Judicial Officer to show his disagreement with the conclusion of the Investigating Officer before taking cognizance of the offence and issuance of the process.

Tags : RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT   JUDICIAL OFFICER   NEGATIVE FINAL REPORT   COGNIZANCE  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved