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

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Ghanshyam Ptel @ Lallu – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent


Advocates:
Siddharth Datt,Advocate General

With the consent, finally heard.

This revision filed under Section 397/401 of the Criminal Procedure

Code (hereinafter referred as 'Cr.P.C.') takes exception to the order dated

29/06/2018 passed in Sessions Trial No.44/2017 by learned Second Additional

Sessions Judge, Umariya, whereby charge under Sections 467/120-B, 468/120-

B and 471/120-B of the Indian Penal Code are framed against the applicant.

Shri Manish Datt, learned Senior Advocate for the applicant by placing

1

reliance on the factual backdrop which is reproduced in the charge as well as in

the FIR urged that as per the case of prosecution, applicant's younger brother

Raghunath Patel by projecting himself to be present appellant and by using the

mark-sheet/documents of present applicant secured employment in South

Eastern Coalfields Limited (SECL). Accordingly, employer lodged the FIR on

27/06/2014 as Crime No.220/2014. On the basis of this FIR, the investigation

was conducted and ultimately the matter travelled to the Court and Court below

framed the charges on 29/06/2018.

Learned Senior Advocate submits that there is no independent charge

made under Section 120-B of IPC against the applicant. A Division Bench of

this Court in Criminal Ap

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