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

2006 Supreme(All) 1020

VINOD PRASAD
Ata Ullaha Mohd. Hadi – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent


Advocates:
G.S.HAJELA,

VINOD PRASAD, J.

( 1 ) HEARD Sri G. S. Hazela Advocate, counsel for the applicants and the learned A. G. A. on behalf of respondent State. As the facts are not disputed and the argument of the counsel for the applicant is confined only on the impugned order dated 6. 3. 06, passed by I/c ACJM (Railways), farrukhabad, in case No. 378a of 05 State v. Masrruddin, therefore this stage itself as has been agreed between both the parties.

( 2 ) THE facts stated lies in a narrow compass. A, NCR No. 60 of 05 was registered at the instance of one Mohd. Hanif at the police station Jahanganj, District Farrukhabad on 17. 8. 05 at 2. 30 PM under Sections 323/504/506 IPC against four persons as malefactors namely Mazruddin, bashruddin, Muzzavil, and Wasin in respect of an incident alleged to have taken place on 17. 8. 2005 at 1. 15 PM. The incident was regarding abusing filthy and beating by lathis and dandas by the accused to the brother of the informant namely Noor Mohd. On 1. 9. 05 an application was filed by the informant to convert the said NCR into offence under Sections 323/504/506/308 IPC before Superintendent of Police Fatehgarh. This application was accompanied by medical report dated 17.










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