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

2007 Supreme(Del) 1916

PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
VIJAY KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Anil Soni, D.C.MATHUR, Viresh B.Sawhney, Vishal Gosain

PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.

( 1 ) VIDE above captioned 4 petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 a challenge is laid to the common order dated 30. 1. 2004 passed by the Additional Session Judge whereby revision petition filed by the public prosecutor against the order dated 3. 11. 2001 passed by the learned metropolitan Magistrate refusing to grant permission to the prosecution to withdraw cases against petitioners was/were dismissed.

( 2 ) THE facts giving rise to the present petitions are that four complaints were filed against accused persons on similar facts, inter alia stating as under:-

A. That on 4. 4. 1994, Sanjeev Gupta, D. P. Singh and C. B. Bopora, inspectors of Prevention of Food Adulteration Department visited M/s. V. S. Dry fruit at shop No. 494 A, Katra Ishwar Bhawan, Khari Baoli, Delhi for taking samples of food articles for analysis. B. A mob gathered and petitioners did not allow the officials to take samples and along with some other persons abused, assaulted, obstructed and manhandled the officials and also prevented them from taking samples of the food articles for analysis. C. That matter was reported to the local police and FIRs bearin









































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