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

1973 Supreme(J&K) 24

D.D.THAKUR
Dina Nath – Appellant
Versus
Hans Raj – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Advocate For Appellant: R.P. Bakshi
Advocate For Respondent: B.B. Bakshi

Whether or not the provisions of Section 195 (1) (c) of the Code of Criminal Procedure are attracted in application so as to bar a prosecution on behalf of a complainant other than a court is the short but ticklish and simple but a debatable question which calls for determination in this revision application. The circumstances under which the question has arisen and the background to which the question is referable can be appreciated from the contents of the paras which follow: -

The petitioner was the defendant and the respondent the plaintiff in a suit for recovery of money in the Court of Subordinate Judge at Reasi. The suit culminated in a decree in favour of the plaintiffs against the defendant with costs, the date of decree being 16-10-1968.

To enable them to take out execution of the decree the decree-holders applied for a copy of the decree-sheet from the Court of the Sub Judge, Reasi. The decree-sheet mentioned the amount of costs as Rs. 90/-. The copy of the decree-sheet obtained by the decree-holders, it was alleged by the petitioner in this revision application, was forged by the respondents-decree-holders by making insertions in it raising the amount of cost by another s








































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