SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2001 Supreme(SC) 214

D.P.MOHAPATRA, SHIVARAJ V.PATIL
Tukaram Annaba Chavan – Appellant
Versus
Machindra Yeshwant Patil – Respondent


JUDGMENT

D.P. Mohapatra, J.-Leave granted.

2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. We have perused the order dated 1.12.1999 of the Bombay High Court in Criminal Writ Petition No. 290/1999 which is under challenge in the present appeal.

4. In this appeal the accused have sought to assail the order dated 2.11.1995 of the Judicial Magistrate 1st class, Atpadi issuing process against them which was confirmed by the IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Sangli, in Criminal Revision Application Nos. 317/95 and 318/95 and by the High Court in the impugned order. The aforementioned criminal case was registered on the private complaint by Dr. Machindra Yeshwant Patil, Respondent No. 1 herein. Invoking Sections 177, 181, 193, 406, 465, 474 read with Sections 34 IPC. The complainant alleged, inter alia, that the accused persons have got affixed bogus/fake signatures/thumb impressions of the members of the educational institution viz. "Modern Education Society", by themselves or through other persons, for the purpose of showing that there was necessary quorum in the General Body Meeting held on 27.9.1984 in which a resolution was purportedly passed a set-up a new executive body, and ther











Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top