JASRAJ CHOPRA
Teju Mal – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
2. The facts necessary to be noticed for the disposal of this petition briefly stated are: that petitioner Tejumal filed a complaint in the Court of the learned Mansif & Judicial Magistrate, Anoopgarh on 19 1.1982 pleading inter-alia, that accused-non-pelitioner Dayakrishna and one more person came to his house on 10 1.1982 at about 4 PM. They were in police dress. They gave out that they have been sent by the Dy. S. P. Hanumangarh. Accused-non-petitioner Daya Krishna told him that he is the Reader working in the Office of the Dy. S. P. Hanumangarh whereas his companion told him that he is working as constable in that office. It is alleged that these accused-petitioners told the complainant Tejumal that the Jeep which is in his possession is a stolen property and so, he should hand over all the papers rela
(8) H.S. Baina vs. State (AIR 1980 SC 1883)
(15) D. Lakshminarayana vs. V. Narayana (AIR 1976 SC 1672)
(9) Chandan Lal vs Nand Lal (1987 RLW 530)
(11) Jagdish vs. State (1988(1) RLW 227)
(14) Makhan Singh vs. State of Raj. (1987 RLW 386)
(17) Bet Ram Bhanwar Lal vs. State of Raj. (1988 (J) RLW 322)
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.