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

2022 Supreme(MP) 3

SANJAY DWIVEDI
J. B. S. Chandel – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Manish Datt with Sameer Agrawal for applicants; Devendra Gangrade, Panel Lawyer for respondent No. 1/State; R.P. Mishra for respondent No. 2.

ORDER

1. Considering the facts and circumstances of these petitions and the issue involved in the same since interconnected with each other, therefore, all these petitions are heard and decided analogously by this common order. These petitions have been filed by the petitioners under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of the entire proceedings pending in the Court of First Additional Sessions Judge, Shahdol vide S.T. No.184/2012 and also for quashing the order dated 08.03.2013 passed by the said Court framing charges against the petitioners under sections 302, 120-B read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and also order dated 8.11.2012 passed by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Shahdol whereby the application filed by the petitioners under section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been rejected.

2. Laconic facts of the case are that respondent No.2 had filed a complaint in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shahdol inter alia on the ground that her son Rajkumar @ Chhota Gudda was on the way to his sister’s house on 29.11.2006 along with his friend Bhupendra Sharma and when they were crossing the Mudna river, the petitioners along with o

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