Breaking SUPREME COURT CRACKS DOWN ON HOME LOAN SUBVENTION FRAUD: CBI PROBE EXPEDITED, 30-DAY SANCTION DEADLINE FOR BANK OFFICIALS
New Delhi · Monday, 10 August 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2018-02-23 allowed

Rajendra Rajoriya vs Jagat Narain Thapak and Another

Bench: 2 — N.V. Ramana

In Brief

The appellant filed a criminal complaint alleging fraud, forgery, and caste-based harassment in a land transaction matter. The Magistrate initially dismissed the complaint, but the Sessions Court remanded it for further inquiry. The Magistrate then took cognizance and registered the case. The High Court quashed the complaint, reasoning that the revisional court had improperly taken cognizance. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, holding that the Sessions Court did not take cognizance but merely ordered remand for further inquiry. The High Court wrongly conflated cognizance with issuing summons. The trial court must now reconsider the complaint independently, without being influenced by the Sessions Court's observations.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Criminal Procedure Criminal Revision Cognizance of Offences Fraud and Forgery SC/ST Atrocities Act Jurisdiction of Magistrate

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login