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

1993 Supreme(SC) 505

B.P.JEEVAN REDDY, S.C.AGRAWAL
Kabir Chawla – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. – Respondent


( 1 ) WE have heard the petitioner who has appeared in person on the writ petition filed by him.

( 2 ) THE petitioner has made a grievance in relation to the proceedings that have been initiated against him by the District Magistrate, Nainital, by the show-cause notice dated 10/03/1993 under Section 3 (1 of the U. P. Control of Goondas Act, 1970. The petitioner states that he has submitted his reply to the show-cause notice but no final order has been made so far and that he has to appear before the District Magistrate. The petitioner, however, prays that the said proceedings may be quashed. We do not find any ground for quashing the said proceedings at this stage. The matter is under consideration before the District Magistrate. It is open to the petitioner to satisfy the District Magistrate that no ground has been made out for passing the order against him. In the writ petition the petitioner has not made out a case that in issuing the show-cause notice the District Magistrate was actuated by mala fides. There is, therefore, no reason to assume that the District Magistrate would not give a fair consideration to the matter. We are, therefore, unable to accept the submissions of th



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