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

2012 Supreme(Raj) 1468

SANDEEP MEHTA
Shyam Lal – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner:S.S. Shaktawat, Advocate.
For the Respondents/State: M.A. Bhurat, Public Prosecutor.

JUDGMENT

1. - Heard. The instant misc. petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 15.1.2008 passed by the S.P., Chittorgarh directing opening of history sheet of the petitioner and praying for the quashing of the history sheet opened against him.

2. Succinctly stated the facts necessary for the disposal of the instant petition are that the S.P., Chittorgarh by his order dated 15.1.2008 issued a direction for opening the history sheet of the petitioner. The case of the petitioner is that between the year 1991 to the date of passing of the impugned order, four .criminal cases in all were registered against him and out of them two cases have resulted into the acquittal and from the remaining two as well, the petitioner was convicted in one and the appeal challenging. the conviction is pending before this Court. It has also been stated that no criminal case or criminal activity was reported against the petitioner between the years 2002 to 2006. Therefore, it has been stated by way of the instant misc. petition that the provisions of Rajasthan Police Rules do not empower the S.P., Chittorgarh to direct opening of the history sheet against the petitioner.

3. On t





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