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

RAJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
Jagesh – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Shri Pushpendra Dubey, Advocate.
For the Respondent/State: Shri Vinod Mishra, P. L.

ORDER

Since, both the petitions arise from the same order and the relief sought are identical, therefore, these petitions are being heard and decided analogously by this common order.

2. These revision petitions under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. have been preferred by the petitioners being aggrieved by the order dated 16.08.2018 in S.T. No. 40/2018 passed by 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Multai, Distt. Betul, whereby the learned ASJ has framed the charges for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC against the petitioners.

3. According to the case, a written complaint was made by one Chayendra Kumar Budekar, Project Officer, Child Welfare Service, Amla, District Betul, to the police station-Amla alleging that the applications were invited for the post of Aanganwadi Worker, in pursuance to which the interested candidates have filed their candidature-ship enclosing the relevant documents with their applications. It is further stated that on the basis of merits of applicants therein, the merit list was published but certain objections were filed in respect of filing forged mark-sheets by the candidates, hence, the same was enquired about and mark-she

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