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

2019 Supreme(All) 2415

SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH
Arjun – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Suneel Kumar Mishra
For the Respondents: G.A. and Ravi Chandra Srivastava

ORDER :

Saumitra Dayal Singh, J.

1. Heard Sri. Suneel Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri. Ravi Chandra Srivastava, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The present 482, Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the entire proceedings as well as summoning order dated 10.08.2016 passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist, Bhadohi, in Complaint Case No. 340 of 2013 (Ram Abhilakh v. Arjun & others), under Sections-419, 420, I.P.C., Police Station-Suriyawan, District- Bhadohi, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate Ist, Bhadohi.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the dispute between the parties was purely civil in nature and there was no occurrence of any criminal offence. It is thus submitted that undisputed facts of the case are that the applicants Arjun, Bheem and Ramu (Applicant Nos. 1, 2 and 3) had executed a general Power of Attorney in favour of opposite party No. 2 on 24.12.1993 with respect to their agricultural land. Acting under the said general Power of Attorney, opposite party No. 2 executed a registered sale deed on 08.03.1999 in favour of his sons Lal Chandra, Suresh Chandra, Mata Shankar and Dinesh

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