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

2008 Supreme(All) 1798

S.C.AGARWAL
SUNIL KUMAR AGARWAL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared
Counsel for the Revisionist : Ashwini Kumar A wasthi and Manish Tiwari.
Counsel for the Respondent: AG.A

JUDGMENT

S.C. AGARWAL J.

1. Heard Sri Manish Tiwary, learned Counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the material on record.

The instant revision is directed against the order dated 7.7:2010 passed by A.C.J.M., Court No. 1, Varanasi in final report No. 15 of 2010 under sections 323, 308, 504 and 506, IPC, Police Station Rohania, District Varanasi whereby the final report submitted by the police was accepted and protest petition filed by revisionist complainant was rejected.

2. The facts are that the revisionist complainant Sunil Kumar Agarwal and the accused Ashok Kumar and Anil Kumar are real brothers, They live in the same house. On 22.1.2003, a FIR was lodged by the complainant at Police Station Rohania, District Varanasi stating therein that there was a dispute with the accused persons due to partition of the property in respect of which, FIR was earlier lodged on 19.12.2009 against the accused persons at P.S. Mughal Sarai, which was registered at crime No. 544 of 2009 under sections 341, 352, 504 and 506, IPC. On 31.12.2009 at about 7:00 p.m., the complainant and few of his friends and relatives had made a program to celebrate the New Year Eve at 'T















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