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

2005 Supreme(All) 2492

IMTIYAZ MURTAZA, RAVINDRA SINGH
NAKSHATER PAL SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates:
V.C.MISHRA, Vivek Mishra,

RAVINDRA SINGH, J.

Heard Sri V. C. Mishra, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Vivek Mishra, learned Counsel for the contemners Nakshetra Pal Singh, Advocate and Vijay Pal Singh, Advocate and the learned Government Advocate.

2. In the present case criminal contempt proceedings have been initiated on the basis of reference made by Sri Virendra Kumar, Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 2 Saharanpur (hereinafter referred to as Presiding Officer) against the contemners Nakshetra Pal Singh, Advocate and Vijay Pal Singh, Advocate practising at Civil Court, Saharanpur under Section 15 (2) of the Contempt of Courts Act 1971, mentioning therein that on 10-2-2005 the examination-in-chief of P. W. 12 Brijesh Kumar was recorded by the Presiding Officer, in ST. No. 345 of 2001 under Section 460/411 I. P. C. P. S. Chilkana district Saharanpur. After recording the examination-in-chief of P. W. 12, contemner Nakshetra Pal Singh, Advocate who was appearing on behalf of the accused Sushil and Kulvendra started cross- examining, the witness, who gave the reply. The Presiding Officer asked the contemner Nakshetra Pal Singh to clarify from P. W. 12 whether he was understanding the





































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