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

2016 Supreme(Del) 3803

VIPIN SANGHI
Vijay Kumar Bansal – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Jitendra Sethi
For the Respondent: Ms. Kamna Vohra

JUDGMENT :

Vipin Sanghi, J.

1. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition to seek the setting aside of orders dated 09.01.2013 and 10.05.2016 passed by the learned ASJ, and the order dated 21.01.2015 passed by the learned MM, Saket Courts, Delhi, whereby the application of the petitioners under Section 256 Cr PC was dismissed. Though the writ petition in its title invokes Article 226 with Article 227 of the Constitution of India, upon an objection being raised by the respondent that a writ petition under Article 226 would not lie to assail a judicial order, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the present petition may be treated as one under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, namely, under the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court.

2. The factual background, as extracted by the learned ASJ-04 and Spl Judge (NDPS) South East, Saket Courts, Delhi in the impugned order dated 10.05.2016 passed in Crl. Revision No.148/2015 titled, “Vijay Kumar Bansal & Pradeep Kumar Bansal v. State” is as follows:-

a. Complainant Smt. Kalpana Bhattacharya was employed as a Music Teacher in MCD Primary School, Kailash Colony and was engaged in the Census Program conducted


















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