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

1953 Supreme(HP) 16

CHOWDHRY
Satya Dev Bushehari – Appellant
Versus
Ghanshiam – Respondent


Advocates:
Bhagat Singh Chawala, for Petitioner; Panna Lal Bahl, for Respondent; A.C. Mehta, Ag. Govt. Advocate, for the State.

JUDGMENT :- This is an application in revision against the order of the Magistrate first class Kasumpti, dated 11-3-1953, taking cognizance of a complaint filed against the petitioner by the respondent. The offences alleged against the petitioner are forgery under section 465 and using as genuine a forged document under S.471, I.P.C., in respect of a nomination paper filed by him before the Returning Officer on 12-10-1951 under S.33 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. There was a quadrangular fight to fill a seat in the Himachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly from the Rajgarh constituency, the present petitioner Satya Dev Bushahari and respondent Ghanshiam being two of the contestants. The nomination paper delivered by the petitioner to the Returning Officer on 12-10-1951 mentioned one Sudarshan Das as the proposer. On 17-10-1951, the date fixed for the scrutiny of nominations, it was objected that the signature of Sudarshan Das on the nomination paper had been forged. The Returning Officer rejected the objection and accepted the nomination paper. The polling took place on 19 and 20-11-1951, and on the 30th of that month the Returning Officer declared the respondent Ghansh
















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