Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Disposition
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Disposition
Judges

    Vivek Goenka And Others v. Y.R Patil .

    Order

    1. Leave granted.

    2. There is no reason to quash the prosecution at this stage as against Accused 1 and 4.

    3. It is for the accused concerned to show that they are protected by one of the exceptions in Section 499 IPC as publication is also undisputed.

    4. However, we do not think it necessary to retain Accused 2 and 3 in the array of the accused as their connection with the publication is too remote even on the averments made in the complaint. Hence, we order them to be deleted from the party array. Accused 1 and 4 in the complaint will be reranked as Accused 1 and 2 and would be proceeded against. It is open to those accused to apply for exemption from personal appearance and on such application being made the trial court shall exempt them from personal appearance on the following conditions:

    1. A counsel on their behalf would be present in the Court whenever their case is taken up.
    2. They will not dispute their identity as the accused in the case.
    3. They will be present in Court when such presence is imperatively needed.

    5. With these directions the appeal is disposed of.

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    Vivek Goenka And Others v. Y.R Patil .
    (Jan 13, 2000)