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

2013 Supreme(Raj) 769

SANDEEP MEHTA
Tulsidas – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner:P.N. Mohanani, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Chandralekha, Public Prosecutor.

JUDGMENT

1. - The instant revision petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner-complainant challenging the order dated 19.2.2010 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Sojat in Criminal Revision No. 28/2009, whereby, the learned revisional court has quashed the order dated 3.6.2009 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) and Judicial Magistrate, Sojat framing charge for the offence under Section 207 IPC against the respondent No. 2.

2. Briefly stated the facts necessary for the disposal of this revision petition are that the petitioner filed a complaint against the respondent No. 2 and the Sarpanch of the concerned village namely Sampat Raj Modi for the offences under Sections 198, 420 read with Section 34 IPC in the court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sojat. The complaint was sent to the Police under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. The police after investigation filed a negative final report in the matter. The complainant filed a protest petition. The statements of the complainant and his witnesses were recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., where after, cognizance for the offences under Sections 467 and 467/120B IPC was taken against the respondent No.











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