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

1987 Supreme(Guj) 63

P.M.CHAUHAN
KANAKSINH HATHISINH JADEJA – Appellant
Versus
BALBHADRASINH NARENDRASINH JHALA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: C.K.THAKKER, D.D.Vyas

P. M. CHAUHAN, J.

( 1 ) THIS Miscellaneous Criminal Application under sec. 482 Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Code) is filed by the petitioners (original accused) challenging the Order dated 9-11-1984 in M. Enquiry Case No. 31 of 1984 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Surendranagar directing Police Sub-Inspector Wadhwan to investigate the complaint under sub-sec. (3) of sec. 156 of the Code and submit the report.

( 2 ) IT transpires that the learned Magistrate on receiving the complaint had not examined the complaint before him under sec. 200 or 202 of the Code and had not taken the cognizance of the offence on the complaint and directed the Police to investigate under sub-sec. (3) of sec. 156 of the Code.

( 3 ) OPPONENT No. 1 filed the complaint in the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Surendranagar against the petitioners contending that petitioner No. 1 opponent No. 1 Prabhashanker Manilal Pandya and Sushilakumari Natvarsinh Parmar were the partners of the business carried on in the name and style of Uchem Laboratory for manufacturing medicines injections etc. since 5-11-1985 and petitioner No. 1 Kanaksinh Hathisinh Jadeja was managing











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