Back
SYED AFTAB HUSAIN RIZVI
Kaushlesh Mishra – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
[Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi, J.]
1. Heard Sri Byas Kumar Prasad, learned counsel for the revisionists and learned A.G.A. for the State. However, none appeared on behalf of opposite party no.2.
2. This criminal revision has been filed with the prayer to set aside judgement and order dated 18.04.2015 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siddharthnagar in Criminal Complaint Case No.277 of 2013 (Ripusudan Mishra Versus Kaushlesh Mishra and others) under Sections 506 and 427 I.P.C. , Police Station Siddharthnagar, District Siddharthnagar, pending the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siddharthnagar.
3. In brief, the facts of the case are that opposite party no.2 moved an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. against revisionists and Sub Inspector Santraj Yadav, Constable Rauf Khan and five unknown constables, alleging therein that the father of the opposite party no.2 paid Nazrana of Rs.20/-to ex-Zamindar on 30.09.1951 and obtained 00.3.10 area of previous no.362, present no.56 of Village Rehra. The applicant got constructed foundation and boundary wall over the same. On 20.09.2012 at about 5.00 p.m. Kaushlesh Mishra pretending himself to be a journalist moved an app
The main legal point established in the judgment is the proper procedure for handling discharge applications in cases triable by the court of session, as per the provisions of the Criminal Procedure ....
Filing simultaneous revisions in different courts on the same matter violates Section 397(3) Cr.P.C. and constitutes misuse of legal process.
The right of the accused to cross-examine witnesses before framing of charges is a valuable right, and the application of Section 245(2) Cr.P.C. for discharge should be considered in light of this ri....
The accused has the right to cross-examine prosecution witnesses before framing of charges.
The Executive Magistrate's findings on possession under Section 145 Cr.P.C. are binding unless proven perverse, and jurisdiction over title disputes lies with civil courts.
The rejection of a discharge application is valid when a prima facie case exists based on the police report, regardless of subsequent exoneration in departmental inquiries.
The public prosecutor must independently assess the legitimacy of withdrawal from prosecution under Section 321 Cr.P.C, ensuring it serves public justice.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
