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

1995 Supreme(MP) 54

C.K.PRASAD
S. G. Pathak – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
P.K. Saxena for petitioner; Girish Desai, Deputy Government Advocate for State.

ORDER

C.K. Prasad, J. -- 1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dt. 28.12.94 passed by the Special Judge, Dhar, in Sp. Case No. 4/93. The petitioner has filed an application before the Special Judge, for dropping up the criminal proceedings and by the aforesaid order the same has been rejected.

2. The short facts giving rise to the present application are that one Deepakbhai Patel, gave an information to the Supdt. of Police of the Special Police Establishment stating therein that he is the Manager of the Appex Electro Statistics. He has further stated in his application that he has filed return in the office of Central Excise and the petitioner, who happens to be a Superintendent of Central Excise, demanded an illegal gratification of Rs. 5,000/- for clearance of the monthly forms. Said Patel, in his information, further stated that he did not want to give illegal gratification to the Superintendent and desired that he be apprehended. Accordingly, a trap was led on 31.1.1994 and Rs. 5,000/- alleged to have been recovered from the possession of the petitioner.

3. Shri Saxena, appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the conduct of investigation and submissions of the



























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