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

2016 Supreme(SC) 1028

A.K.SIKRI, N.V.RAMANA
Suresh – Appellant
Versus
State Represented by Inspector of Police – Respondent


ORDER

On 23rd September, 2005, at about 6 p.m., one person known as Kumaraguru, who was a practicing lawyer, was murdered. According to the prosecution, this occurrence was witnessed by PW-1(Ganesan), who is the brother of the deceased. He immediately went to the police station narrating the details of the incident and on the basis of the statement, First Information Report (FIR) was recorded by the Investigating Officer (IO) viz., M. Kalifulla (PW-22). It was stated by him that his deceased brother was practicing as an Advocate at Usilampatti Bar. He was a subscriber in a private chit run by Pon Pandian alias Treasury Pandy, Accused No. 1 (A-1). As per the chit transaction, A-1 was liable to pay a sum of Rs. 5,15,000/- to the deceased. Out of this, only a part sum of Rs.1,40,000/- was paid. Because of the non-payment of remaining amount, the deceased had lodged a complaint against A-1 in the Usilampatti Police Station and a case was also registered as Crime No. 1309 of 2003 under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). It was further stated that pursuant to the said registration of crime at the instance of the deceased, the Inspector of Police had inquired into the ma

































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