SHAMIM AHMED
Pankaj Jaiswal – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Learned counsel for the applicant is permitted to correct the district in the body of the application during course of the day.
2. Heard Sri Amrendra Nath Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Anurag Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
3. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of the charge sheet dated 22.11.2019 and cognizance order dated 18.03.2020 in Case No.9149 of 2020 (State of U.P. Vs. Pankaj Jaiswal & others) arising out of Case Crime No.1242 of 2017, under Sections 406, 420, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Chakeri, District Kanpur Nagar, pending in the Court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar. A further prayer has also been made to stay the further proceedings of the aforesaid case.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants submit that on 07.11.2017 the respondent no.2 lodged an F.I.R. against the applicants, which was registered as case crime no.1242/2017, under Sections 406, 420, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Chakeri, District Kanpur Nagar.
5. As per the prosecution version of the F.I.R, the opposite party no.2 purchased a plot (arazi no.684) from the applicant and a
Abdul Rehman Antulay vs. R.S. Nayak
Bhushan Kumar and Anr. v. State (NCT of Delhi) and Anr.
Darshan Singh Ram Kishan v. State of Maharashtra
H.N. Rishbud vs. State of Delhi
Hussainara Khatoon (I) vs. State of Bihar
Kanti Bhadra Vs State of West Bengal
Menka Gandhi vs. Union of India
P. Ramchandra Rao vs. State of Karnatka
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.