Back
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Dr V R K Krupa Sagar, J
Shaik. Inthiyazuddin – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. criminal revision case initiated against refusal to discharge. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. prosecution's allegations regarding property ownership and fraud. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. accused claims bona fide purchase; trial court's rejection of defenses. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. court's responsibility to assess prima facie evidence for charges. (Para 8 , 14 , 17) |
| 5. arguments from both sides regarding trial court's decision. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 6. legal standards for evaluating charges and evidence. (Para 11 , 12 , 18) |
| 7. definition of forgery and its application to the case. (Para 13 , 15) |
| 8. legal principles governing the framing of charges. (Para 19 , 20) |
| 9. insufficient evidence to support charges against the accused. (Para 21 , 22) |
| 10. conclusion allowing revision and discharging the petitioner. (Para 23 , 24) |
ORDER:
Accused No.7 preferred this Criminal Revision Case under Sections 397 and 401 of Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) impugning the order dated 24.01.2023 of learned Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-XI Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Gannavaram in Crl.M.P.No.1491 of 2016 in C.C.No.08 of 2017 whereby and whereunder the learned trial Court refused to discharge him from C.C.No.08 of 2017. Re
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
