Back
JAMMU AND KASHMIR HIGH COURT
R. C. Gandhi, J.
Arjun Dev Kohli v. State of J. and K. and Another
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's property is linked to alleged conspiracy. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 8) |
| 2. evidence presented does not support benami claims. (Para 6 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. sanctioning prosecution without a public servant status is invalid. (Para 16 , 17 , 19) |
| 4. burden of proof for benami rests on asserting party. (Para 20 , 21 , 24 , 25) |
| 5. lack of prima facie evidence leads to petition allowance. (Para 32 , 35) |
1.The petitioner has presented this petition seeking to quash Government Order No. 29 - GAD (Vig.) of 1998 dated 6-5-1998, whereby respondents have granted sanction to prosecute the petitioner for having allegedly committed offences punishable under S. 5(2) of the P.C. Act, 2006 read with S. 120 - B, RPC, and further seeks to quash FIR No. 27 of 1997 and also Challan No. 2 of 1998 pending in the Court of learned Special Judge Anti - Corruption, Jammu to the extent it pertains to the alleged involvement of the petitioner.
2. The f actual matrix of the case briefly is that an FIR No. 27 of 1997 came to be registered against Shri Hem Raj Gupta, a public servant working as Section Officer in the Office of Deputy Commissioner, Kathua upon a complaint alleging therein that he, i
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
