TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 1528X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is made out for interference, it will not be proper for this Court to pass an order of restraint, restraining the Investigating Agency from arresting the litigants. However, in the preceding sentence itself, Their Lordships observed that when this Court finds that taking into consideration the parameters of quashing and self-restraint, a case is made out for exercising jurisdiction, it may pass interim orders as are found apposite in law. One of the principles on which the Courts are required to function is judicial propriety. When several coordinate Benches of this Court have found prima facie substance in the challenge raised before this Court, in our considered view, it will be against judicial propriety to come to a different conclus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to the authority in Hema Mishra [Hema Mishra v. State of U.P. - (2014) 4 SCC 453] as that specifically deals with the case that came from the State of Uttar Pradesh where Section 438 Cr.PC has been deleted. It has concurred with the view expressed in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh [Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. (2009 4 SCC 437]. The said decision, needless to say, has to be read in the context of the State of Uttar Pradesh. We do not intend to elaborate the said principle as that is not necessary in this case. What needs to be stated here is that the States where Section 438 Cr.P.C. has not been deleted and kept on the statute book, the High Court should be well advised that while entertaining petitions under Article 226 of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -restraint, a case is made out for exercising jurisdiction, it may pass interim orders as are found apposite in law. 5. One of the principles on which the Courts are required to function is judicial propriety. When several coordinate Benches of this Court have found prima facie substance in the challenge raised before this Court, in our considered view, it will be against judicial propriety to come to a different conclusion without hearing the Petition on merits. 6. In that view of the matter, since several Benches of this Court have prima facie found substance in the submissions and that too on the basis of law laid down by this Court in Om Prakash and Anr. v. Union of India and Anr - (2011) 14 SCC 1 = 2011 (272) E.L.T. 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
