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

2019 Supreme(All) 1765

RAM KRISHNA GAUTAM
Irfan – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Applicant : Virendra Singh Tomar, Rajiv Sisodia.
For the Opposite Party : G.A.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. representing the State. Perused the records.

2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by applicant Irfan against State of U.P. and Ishahak @ Ishak with prayer to quash the summoning order dated 21.08.2017 as well as entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 177/9/2017, Ishahak @ Ishak Vs. Gayyoor and others, under Sections 420 I.P.C., P.S. Titavi, district Muzaffarnagar, pending in court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Bijnore. Though it is orally argued that it is Muzaffarnagar and due to typographical error mentioned as Bijnore.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that first complaint was filed by the wife of opposite party no.2 Ishahak @ Ishak which was dismissed in default. Again this second complaint bearing No. 177/9/2017 was filed by opposite party no.2 wherein no ingredient against applicant Irfan is made out for offence punishable under Section 420 I.P.C. because he was a simply witness for a deed executed by Gayyoor for his own land in favour of Rahil. He was not aware of any previous agreement to sell executed in the name of wife of opposite party no.2. H

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