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

1992 Supreme(Guj) 71

B.C.PATEL
JAYANTIBHAI LALUBHAI PATEL – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: NITIN AMIN, S.R.DIVETIA

PATEL, J.

( 1 ) RULE. Mr. Divetia, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor waives service of rule. At the request of learned Counsels, application is heard today. Petitioner has filed these applications as his application for obtaining certified copy of complaint was not entertained by Judicial Magistrate, First class, Patan. The facts relevant for deciding these applications are as under : one complaint has been registered by Patan Taluka Police Station as c. R. No. 34 of 1992 on 25-2-1992. Some allegations were made in the complaint against the petitioner and therefore petitioner wanted to approach this Court for obtaining orders under Sec. 438 of the Criminal Procedure code (hereinafter referred to as the code ). With a view to present his case before this Court, the petitioner applied for certified copy of First information Report (hereinafter referred to as F. I. R. for brevity) referred to above and also deposited Rs. 10. 00 on 5-3-1992. However, his application was rejected and order was passed to the effect that the amount be refunded and application may be filed. Being aggrieved by that order the petitioner has approached this Court.

( 2 ) MR. Nitin Amin, learned Advocate for the p







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