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

1980 Supreme(Cal) 3

P.C.BOROOAH, B.N.MAITRA
JAY KRISHNA CHAKRABORTY – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Dipti Kana Bose, Sudipto Maitra

P. C. Borooah, B. N. Maitra

( 1 ) THE allegation is that the opposite party No. 2, Tarapada Sen Gupta filed a petition of complaint on the 19th March, 1976, before the S. D. J. M. , Arambagh. The allegation was that the petitioners held out hope to him that he would get a permit for a bus and they would purchase the same for him. On the faith of that representation, they handed over a sum of Rs. 15,000/- to the petitioners. Further the petitioner took various sums of money from many persons on the assurance of providing them with jobs. On that date, the learned Magistrate perused the petition of complaint, took cognizance and directed the O/c of the Khankul Police Station under S. 156 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code to treat the petition of complaint as F. I. R. , to make an investigation and to submit a report by the 10th April, 1976. That order was not complied with. The police did not make any investigation on the plea that they had no jurisdiction because the incident had taken place beyond the jurisdiction of the Khankul Police Station. Then on the 23rd March, 1976, the opposite party filed another petition of complaint before the S. D. J. M. He took cognizance, examined wi











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