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

1967 Supreme(All) 98

J.N.TAKRU
Vivekanand Nand Kishore – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


Advocates:
R. Pandey, for Applicant; G.A., for Opposite Party.

ORDER :- Vivekanand has filed this revision against the revisional judgment and order of the learned Civil and Sessions Judge, Allahabad, rejecting his application praying for the dropping of the proceedings initiated against him under Sections 406, 420, 467 and 471, I. P. C.

2. The facts giving rise to this revision lie within a narrow compass. It appears that the applicant presented an application before the Compensation Officer, Meja on the 19th, November, 1958 praying for the withdrawal of a sum of Rs. 80-98 P. which was payable as compensation to one Bans Bahadur. The application was accompanied by a Vakalatnama purporting to be signed by Bans Bahadur. The case for the prosecution is that the said Vakalatnama was forged by the applicant as Bans Bahadur had died some time before, and that after withdrawing Rs 80.98 P. on the strength of it, he misappropriated the said sum. When the matter came to the knowledge of the A. D. M. (E), Allahabad he made a report to the Police and the latter after enquiry submitted a charge-sheet against the applicant under sections 406, 420, 467 and 471 I. P. C.

3. When the case came up for hearing in the trial Court the applicant took a preliminary o














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