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

2018 Supreme(All) 64

UMESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI
SAKEENA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
Mohd. Samiuzzaman Khan for the Applicants; G.A. for the Respondent.

JUDGMENT :

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

Heard Sri Mohd. Samiuzzaman Khan, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri L.D. Rajbhar, learned A.G.A., for the State. Perused the record.

2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Special Sessions Trial No. 142 of 2017 (State Vs. Ismail and others) arising out of case crime no. 615 of 2017 under Sections 504, 506 IPC and Section 3 (1) (r) and 3 (1)s of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Bakhira, District Santkabir Nagar.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants in support of this application has submitted with vehemence that from the material brought on the record, no offence is disclosed against the applicants. The present prosecution launched against the applicant is wholly malafide as such, the present proceedings are an abuse of the process of the court. The sole purpose for initiating the criminal proceedings against the applicants is to harass the applicants which is clearly evident from the facts. The allegations made in the FIR are wholly false and fabricated. It was further contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicants have not been arrested by the poli

























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