JYOTESH BANERJEE
D. J. SEN – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent
( 1 ) THE petitioner has filed the present application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 praying for quashing of the prosecution under section 380 of the Indian Penal Code being complain case No. 319/93 pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, 24-Parganas (S), Alipore.
( 2 ) ON 29. 3. 93, the O. P. No. 2 as the complainant filed the aforesaid case before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore under section 380 of the IPC, making 13 persons including the petitioners as the accused. The learned CJM took cognisance and after examining the complainant and his witness he issued process under section 380 IPC against the petitioners who are shown as accused Nos. 11, 12 and 13 in the petition of complaint.
( 3 ) IN the aforesaid petition of complaint Sri S. Agarwala one of the Directors of a company, namely, M/s. Bengal Molecular Industries (P) Ltd. has alleged that the company has its factory at 233/a, Rai Bahadur Road, Calcutta-700 053. Prior to 15. 10. 1982, the electric supply at premises No. 233/a, Rai Bahadur Road, was in the name of M/s. Mahajati Shilpa Sangha and on or about 15. 10. 82 the said M/s. Mahajati Shilpa Sangha
Madhu Limaye v. State of Maharashtra
P. Vijayapal Reddy and Ors. v. The State (Government of India)
Pratibha Rani v. Suraj Kumar and Anr.
REFERRED TO : State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal
Superintendent and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs, West Bengal v. Mohan Singh and Ors.
Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Ram Kishan Rohatagi and Ors.
State of J and K v. Romesh Chandra and Ors.
Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Purshotam Dass Jhunjunwala and Ors.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.