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

2019 Supreme(Gau) 333

PRASANTA KUMAR DEKA
Lena Solo – Appellant
Versus
State of Arunachal Pradesh – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. H.K. Sarma.
For the Respondent: Mr. S. Borthakur.

JUDGMENT :

Prasanta Kumar Deka, J.

1. Heard Mr. D.K. Misra, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. D. Prasad learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. N.N.B. Choudhury, learned Senior Govt. Advocate, Arunachal Pradesh for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Mr. S. Borthakur learned counsel for the respondent No. 3.

2. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioner for quashing the First Information Report (FIR) dated 9.7.2010 lodged by the respondent No. 3 before the officer-in-charge, Itanagar Police Station on 24.7.2010 on the ground that no offence has been disclosed by the said FIR and the registration of Itanagar Police Station Case No. 144/2010 under Section 420 IPC, is an abuse of the process of law and liable to be quashed.

3. During the pendency of the writ petition the respondent No. 2, officer-in-charge, Itanagar P.S. submitted charge sheet before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class on 2.9.2011 against the petitioner No. 2. The petitioner No. 1, wife of the petitioner No. 2 filed additional affidavit by bringing the charge sheet on record and assailed it on the ground that if the allegations made in the charge sheet are ac

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