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

2022 Supreme(All) 1365

Roshan Lal – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Applicant : Amrendra Nath Tripathi, Deepak Kumar Pandey.
For the Opposite Party :Govt. Advocate, Prabhat Kumar, Vimal Shukla.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Amrendra Nath Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Prabhat Kumar assisted by Sri Vimal Shukla, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, Sri Aniruddha Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for the State, and perused the record.

2. Instant application has been filed by the applicant, assailing the order dated 30.6.2016 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.1, District Balrampur in Criminal Revision No. 36 of 2015. He has further challenged the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No.860 of 2014 pending before the Judicial Magistrate-I, District Balrampur.

3. Factual matrix of the case is that the respondent no.2 had filed an application under Section 156 (3) of the Cr.P.C. before the Judicial Magistrate-I, District Balrampur. The respondent no.2 levelled allegation therein that the applicant executed registered agreement to sale on 27th of September 2013 with respect to Gata No.465 having area 0.202 hectare and Gata No.628 having an area 0.142 hectare situated at Village Mathura, Police Stateion Lalia, District Balrampur. The respo

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