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

2009 Supreme(MP) 1174

S.SAMVATSAR, PIYUSH MATHUR
Munnalal – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Anil Mishra for petitioner, Mukund Bhardwaj, Public Prosecutor for State.

ORDER

Mathur, J. - 1. This is a revision petition preferred against the order dated 6.12.2006 passed by the Special Judge, Morena in Sessions Trial No. 03/05, whereby the charges under section 420 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code read with section 13 (1) ( c) (d) and 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, have been framed against the petitioner and an application preferred under section 91 of the Criminal Procedure Code for calling the additional documents/records has been rejected without examining the necessity of summoning of the record for framing of the Charge.

2. The Economical Offences Bureau Office of the State of Madhya Pradesh has submitted a charge-sheet against as many as 13 persons in relation to mis appropriation of funds of Prathmik Bunkar Sahakari Samiti, Noorabad and Prathmik Bunkar Sahakari Samiti, Dattehara, Morena, where petitioner Munna1al was described to be the President of one of the Society during year 1990-93, when on account of misappropriation of funds and nonutilizaion of the fund, certain, offences were found to be committed by the petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that an application under Section 91 of the Crimin








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