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

M.B.SHAH, S.N.VARIAVA
Joseph Mathuri @ Vishveshwarananda – Appellant
Versus
Swami Sachidanand Harisakshi – Respondent


Order

Leave granted.

Heard learned counsel for the appearing parties.

2. This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 3.8.2000 passed by the High Court of Allahabad in Criminal Revision No. 1520 of 2000 filed by respondent No. 1 herein. The High Court held that the application under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code moved by respondent No. 1 before the Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun for directing appellants to register the case against the appellants cannot be treated as a complaint. The impugned order, on the face of it, is totally erroneous and cannot be sustained in law as the said order ignores Section 190 and Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Further, the High Court has not considered the previous order dated 19.7.2000 passed by the Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Rishikesh. In this view of the matter, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order passed by the High Court is set aside.

Appeal allowed.

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