IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Rakesh Kainthla
Uttam Chand Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State of H.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
1. The petitioner has filed the present petition for setting aside the order dated 12.12.2023 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Solan, in case No.89 of 2020, vide which the learned Trial Court had dismissed the application for discharging him for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 420 , 417, 193, 218, 120B and 467 of IPC. (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience).
2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are that the police presented a challan against the accused-petitioner for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 420 , 417, 193, 218, 120B and 467 of IPC. It was asserted that this Court had ordered to hold an inquiry in Criminal Revision No. 140 of 2017 titled Bhesh Ram Mehta versus Bishan Singh and others vide order dated 13.07.2018. It was found after the inquiry that Bhesh Ram Mehta was not indigent. He was not working as a labourer. The statements given to this effect before this Court on 25.04.2018 were factually incorrect. The matter was referred to the police who registered the FIR and condu
Kanti Bhadra Shah v. State of W.B.
Dinesh Tiwari v. State of U.P.
Kanti Bhadra Shah v. State of W.B.
State of Karnataka v. M. Devendrappa and another
Mahendra K.C. v. State of Karnataka
Supriya Jain v. State of Haryana
Iveco Magirus Brandschutztechnik GMBH v. Nirmal Kishore Bhartiya
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.