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

2005 Supreme(Del) 388

MANJU GOEL
INSPECTOR RAJENDER SAINI – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
SANJEEV KUMAR, SUNIL K.MITTAL

MANJU GOEL, J.

( 1 ). THIS criminal revision petition is directed against the order dated 8. 8. 2002 passed by shri S. S. Rathi, M. M. , New Delhi summoning the petitioners in case FIR No. 154/2000 of police station Kapashera under Sections 302/201/34 of Indian Penal Code. This petition was heard and disposed of vide order dated 22. 1. 2004 on the observations that the judgment under challenge ?o suffers from no infirmity, perversity, impropriety or jurisdictional error ?. The order dated 22. 1. 2004 was challenged before the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 1050-1051/2004. The Hon ble Supreme court observed in its order dated 17. 9. 2004 that the matter required deeper consideration and, therefore, set aside the order and remanded the present criminal revision petition for fresh decision. The petition, therefore, was heard again.

( 2 ) THE order of the learned M. M. Dated 8. 8. 2002 appears to have been passed suo moto. The petitioners are two police officers. The charge-sheet was put up before the magistrate for the purpose of taking cognizance of the offence mentioned therein. The learned Magistrate found that while three accused Jaswant, Dharambir and Rajesh had been charge-sh























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