Back
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Baldev Thakur – Appellant
Versus
State of H. P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background surrounding the property sale and familial relationship. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments presented regarding the validity of fir based on prior disputes. (Para 3 , 9) |
| 3. judicial principles established regarding the quashing of firs. (Para 11 , 12 , 20) |
| 4. clarification on the criteria for constituting a cognizable offence. (Para 18 , 19 , 21) |
| 5. conclusion leading to the quashing of the fir due to lack of grounds. (Para 50) |
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The informant-respondent No.2 made a complaint to the police that she is the legal heir and daughter of Dr. G.R. Bazliel. Her family owns property at Mashobra which belonged to her grandfather, Dr. I.R. Bazliel. This property was inherited by Dr. G.R. Bazliel after the death of his father in 1986. Dr. G.R. Bazliel developed severe depression in the year 2013. The informant was taking care of him till 2016. Daljeet Singh, petitioner No. 2, introduced Dr. G.R. Bazliel to Jienpuri Kamsuon -petitioner No. 3 in the year 2016. The informant objected to the relationship between her father and petitioner No. 3. When the petitioners came to know about the objection raised by the informant, they influenced the infor
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
