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

2016 Supreme(UK) 869

SUDHANSHU DHULIA
RAJENDRA KUMAR MAHESHWARI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner:Mr. P.C. Pethshali, Advocate
For the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2:Mr. K.S. Rautela, Government Advocate

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral)

1. Mr. P.C. Pethshali, Advocate present for the petitioner.

2. Mr. K.S. Rautela, Government Advocate, present for the State/respondent nos.1 & 2.

3. This Court finds that the matter is urgent, hence heard on admission.

4. The First Information Report has been lodged by respondent no. 3, which has been registered as Crime/FIR No. 06 of 2016, under Sections 420/467/468 & 471 of IPC, at Police Station ITI, District-Udham Singh Nagar against the present petitioner.

5. The petitioner works in a Post Office. There are allegations of cheating against the present petitioner. Primarily, the allegation against the petitioner is that in collision with one Smt. Janki Upreti and other co-accused committed embezzlement of amount which he has to deposit in the Post Office concerned.

6. This is also prima facie opinion of this Court that though the First Information Report has also been registered under Sections 467/468 & 471 of IPC as well, presently from the averments of the First Information Report, the offences against the above provisions are not made out against the present petitioner. This, however, only a prima facie opinion of this C






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