ANANDA SEN
Sangita Dey – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The lawyers have no objection with regard to the proceeding, which has been held through video conferencing today at 10.30 A.M. They have no complaint in respect to the audio and video clarity and quality.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. The petitioners, in this application, filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. have prayed for quashing the order taking cognizance dated 15.06.2015, passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Jamshedpur in G.R. No. 950 of 2014. By virtue of the aforesaid order, cognizance has been taken for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. Further the order dated 27.04.2018, passed in the aforesaid case has also been challenged. By virtue of the aforesaid order, process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. has been issued against the petitioners in connection with the aforementioned case.
4. This case arises out of a FIR. The FIR was registered for allegedly committing an offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 & 471 of the Indian Penal Code, wherein these two petitioners are the accused.
5. FIR was registered as Bishtupur P.S. Case No. 113 of 2014. The informant is the Branch Manager of the C
Central Bureau of Investigation vs. Sadhu Ram Singla and Others
Gopakumar B. Nair vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another
Indian Oil Corporation vs. NEPC India Limited and Others
Sushil Suri vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another
Subhash Chandra and Another vs. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board and Others
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.