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

2012 Supreme(Del) 3110

V.K.SHALI
Sarita Dode – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner: Mr. S.C. Sagar , Mr. Bhisham Singh, Advo#31;cates.
For the State : Mr. Sunil Sharma, APP.

JUDGMENT :

V.K. Shali, J. (ORAL);—

1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying therein for quashing of order dated 14.8.2012 by virtue of which she has been summoned in Complaint Case No.10/1/12, registered at Police Station Fatehpur Beri to face the trial for an offence under Section 420/380/34 IPC.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and gone through the impugned order. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that no case under Section 380 or 420 IPC is made out warranting the summoning of the petitioner. In this regard, the learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of the court to the impugned order and the documents filed along with the petition.

3. I have carefully considered the submissions. The respondent No.2 filed a complaint case against the petitioner. It was alleged in the complaint that the complainant, Suraj Bharti, was a permanent resident of Khasra No.67, Village Sahurpur, near Chadanhola Bus Stop, New Delhi-110074. He met accused No.1, Sarita Dode, the present petitioner, in the office of Davish Group in the month of April, 2011, where she was working as a receptionist. The s









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