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

2006 Supreme(Raj) 165

H.R.PANWAR
Amar Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mr. J.R. Beniwal, for the Petitioner.
Mr. J.P.S. Chaudhary, Public Prosecutor, for the State.

Judgment

H.R. Panwar, J.-By the instant criminal revision under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, “the Code” hereinafter), the petitioner has challenged the order dated 20.10.2005 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST. (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Merta (for short, “the trial Court” hereinafter) in Criminal Misc. Case No. 31/2005, whereby the trial Court dismissed the application filed by the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner has not filed the partition deed showing that the accused had only 1/8 share in the property ordered to be attached under attachment order.

2. Succinctly stated, the facts of the case are that accused Kishan Lal, who is the son of the petitioner, has been declared absconder in Criminal Case No. 41/2004, State of Rajasthan vs. Babu Lal & Ors., and consequently proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 of the Code have been initiated against accused Kishan Kumar by declaring the accused as absconder and issuing warrant of attachment of the property of accused Kishan Kumar. Since, the attachment order has been issued in respect of Khasra No. 268 which is a joint property of the petitioner and his brothers and the petition





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