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

2013 Supreme(P&H) 162

MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR
Parminder Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Sandeep S.Majithia, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

Mr. Mehinder Singh Sullar, J. (Oral) - Tersely, the facts and material, which need a necessary mention for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant petition and emanating from the record are that, initially in the wake of complaint of complainant-Dalbir Kaur widow of Jaipal Singh Dhillon, respondent No.2(for brevity “the complainant”), a criminal case was registered against the petitioner and his other co-accused, by means of FIR No.389 dated 14.11.2006, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC, by the police of Police Station Civil Lines Amritsar.

2. The complainant claimed that her husband Jaipal Singh Dhillon was the owner of the land in question, situated in village Manwala, Tehsil and District Amritsar. After his death, she along with his other LRs, inherited and became owner of the entire property left by Jaipal Singh Dhillon(deceased). According to the complainant that, the petitioner accused-Parminder Singh and his other co-accused had fraudulently prepared a forged General Power of Attorney dated 13.09.1995 of Jaipal Singh Dhillon and her uncle Madan Gopal Si

























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