SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
Ajit Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. Sumit Prakash, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Manoj Kumar, learned G.A.-III appearing for the State and Mr. Manoj Tandon, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 7.
2. This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a direction upon the respondents-State to pay compensation to the petitioner for his illegal detention of approximately four months i.e. between 14.02.2014 to 27.07.2014, the day, on which, the petitioner was released. Prayer is also made for instituting the FIR against the erring police officials.
3. Mr. Prakash, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that initially only Sanha was instituted on the information of family of Preeti. He submits that on the basis of the fardbeyan of one Sukhram Lohra, the FIR has been lodged, wherein a body of one lady, aged about 25 years, near NH-33, seen to be a married lady has been found. He further submits that the hands of the lady were having bangles and it has been said in the FIR that the lady has been killed somewhere else and her dead body has been burnt. He further submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He
D.K. Basu Versus State of West Bengal
Joginder Kumar Versus State of U.P. & Ors.
Kiran Bedi Versus Committee of Inquiry & Anr., reported in (1989) 1 SCC 494
S. Nambi Narayanan Versus Siby Mathews & Ors.
Sube Singh Versus State of Haryana & Ors. reported in (2006) 3 SCC 178
Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration [(1978) 4 SCC 494 : 1979 SCC(Cri) 155]
State of M.P. Vs. Shyamsunder Trivedi -1995 (4) SCC 262
Tis Hazari Court, Delhi Versus State of Gujarat & Ors., reported in (1991) 4 SCC 406
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.