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

2006 Supreme(Raj) 1753

H.R.PANWAR
MUSTAQ ALI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ABDUL LATIF, J.P.S.Choudhary, K.K.VYAS, Manjul Shrimali

Judgment

( 1 ) BY an application being S. B. Criminal Misc. Application no. 305/06, the petitioner seeks to implead Ikramudeen and mohd. Sabir as petitioners No. 2 and 3 in the instant revision petition.

( 2 ) FOR the reasons mentioned in the application, the application is allowed. Amended cause title has been filed, the same be placed at appropriate place in the file.

( 3 ) WITH the consent of learned counsel for the petitioners, public prosecutor and counsel appearing for the complainant, the revision petition itself is finally heard and being decided at the admission stage.

( 4 ) BY the instant criminal revision petition under Section 397 Cr. P. C. , the accused petitioners have challenged the order dated 12. 4. 2006 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (Fast track) No. 1, Jodhpur (for short the trial court hereinafter) in sessions Case No. 27/2006, whereby the trial court framed the charges against the petitioners No. 1 Mushtaq and No. 2 Mohd. Sabir for the offences under Sections 341, 324 and 307 IPC and against petitioner No. 3 Ikramudeen for the offences under sections 341, 324/34 and 307/34 IPC. Aggrieved by the order impugned, the petitioners have filed the instant revis






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