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

1978 Supreme(AP) 191

K.A.MUKTADAR
C. Sreeamulu – Appellant
Versus
Rangaswamy – Respondent


K. A. MUKTADAR, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner filed a complaint in the XI Metropolitan Magistrate, secunderabad out of which C. C. 436 of 1977 arises. In that complaint the petitioner herein has made N. K. Subhramanyam as Accused-I and V. Rangeswamy as Accused-2, and according to the petitioner, the date of occurrence april 1977. The fact alleged in the complaint, according to the petitioner, make out a cause under Sections 409 and 420 IPC. Another complaint has been filed by A-2 in C. C. 436 of 1977 in that complaint the date Sub-Divisonal judicial Magistrate, Tirupur. In that complaint the date of occurrence is stated to be 20th June 1977. Rangaswamy, who is the Complainant before the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Tirupur has made Sriramulu as A-1 and GVS. Ranga Rao as A-2. Now, GVS. Rangarao, A-2, before the Sub-Divisional judicial Magistrate, Tirupur, is not ihe accused in C. C. 436 of 1977 on the file of the XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad, nor is Subrahmanyam, a-1, in C. C. No. 436 of 1977 on the file of the Xt Metropolitan- magistrate, Secunderabad, as accused in the complaint file before the Sub-Divisional judicial Magistrate, Tirupur. The facts alleged in the compl

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