M.V.MURALIDARAN
Kangujam Ananda Meitei – Appellant
Versus
CBI, SCB, Kolkata – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
M.V. Muralidaran, J.
1. This Criminal Revision Petition has been filed by the petitioner, who has been arrayed as accused No. 14 in S.T. No. 34 of 2016 on the file of the learned Special Judge, ND & PS, Manipur preferred against the order dated 3.4.2019, whereby ordering to frame charges under Sections 420, 468, 471 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 22(c) and 29 of ND & PS Act.
2. The contention of the petitioner is that the view taken by the learned Special Judge is manifestly wrong and as such it has led to miscarriage of justice and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to discharge as there are no materials/evidence to frame charges under Sections 420, 468, 471 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 22(c) and 29 of ND & PS Act against the petitioner. In fact, no presence of the essential ingredients of the offences were on record and no grounds for presuming that the petitioner has committed the alleged offences. Further contention of the petitioner is the materials and documents produced by the prosecution cannot be said to be the facts attracting the ingredients of provisions in Sections 420, 468, 471 read with Section 34 IPC and Sections 22(c) and 29 of ND & PS Act.
State of Punjab v. Rakesh Kumar
Chimanlal Jagjivan Das Sheth v. State of Maharashtra
Union of India v. Sanjeev v. Deshpande
State of M.P. v. S.B. Johari and others
Niranjan Singh Karam Singh Puniabi v. Jitendra Bhimrai Bijjayya (1990) 4 SCC 76 : 1991 SCC (Cri) 471
State of Bihar v. Ramesh Singh (1977) 4 SCC 39 : 1977 SCC (Cri) 5331
Union of India v. Prafulla Kumar Samal (1979) 3 SCC 4 : 1979 SCC (Cri) 6091
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.