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

2010 Supreme(P&H) 2424

SABINA
Dr. Sanjeev – Appellant
Versus
Mahener Partap – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioners:Mr. Baldev Singh, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Anhal Singh, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Mr. Ashit Malik, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

Mrs. Sabina, J.:- Vide this order, both the above mentioned petitions, Criminal Misc. No.M-40080 of 2006 and Criminal Revision No. 580 of 2007, are being disposed of as the controversy involved is the same in both the cases.

2. Criminal Misc. No. M-40080 of 2006 has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (‘Cr.P.C. in short) for quashing of complaint titled as ‘Mahender Partap versus Dr.Sanjeev and another’ under Sections 306 and 506/34 IPC dated 11.3.2005 and the summoning order passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonepat dated 15.5.2006. Criminal Revision No. 580 of 2007 has been filed for setting aside the order dated 7.11.2006 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sonepat whereby charge was ordered to be framed against the petitioners.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely involved in this case at the instance of the complainant. In fact, the complainant himself is facing the trial under Section 304-B, 498-A IPC in FIR No.11 dated 6.1.2005 registered at Police Station Civil Lines Sonepat. The complainant and others had challenged the order vide w























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