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

1989 Supreme(Del) 167

H.C.GOEL
SUMER CHAND – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
MAEHSVAR DAYAL, Parag Chawla, S.P.Mahajan, SALMAN KHURSHID

H. C. Goel, J.

( 1 ) THE plaintiff was prosecuted by the State (Delhi Administration) for the offences punishable under sections 148/365/149/452/ 308/506/149 of the Indian Penal Code. According to the FIR lodged by one Mr. Amit Kumar Tripathi, an employee of Anil Kumar Gupta, defendant No. 5, against the plaintiff, on 27. 12. 1983 on an information having been received on telephone, H. C. Chottu Ram had given an information that in Lakkar Mandi some persons had come in a bus and they indulged in beating with some other persons. Acting on that information S. I. Kripa Shankar Bhatnagar, who is defendant No. 4, then Incharge. Police Post, Maya Puri, along with S. I. . Habib Ahmed reached the place of occurrence. In the meantime, they got a copy of DD No. 33 dated 27. 12. 83 of P. P. Maya Puri. On that S. I. Kripa Shankar Bhatnagar, defendant No. 4, sent one ASI Baldev Singh along with some constable to P. S. Kishmere Gate for inquiry. The statement of one Amit Kumar Tripithi, the complainant and an alleged employee of one M/s. Anil International of which Anil Kumar Gupta, defendant No. 5, is a partner, was recorded, which is the F. I. R. of the case. It was stated by Amit Kumar Tripat







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