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

LUCKNOW BENCH
SHAMBHUNATH PATHAK – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. OF HOME AND ANOTHER – Respondent


Court No. - 13

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4082 of 2023

Applicant :- Shambhunath Pathak

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home And

Another

Counsel for Applicant :- Anuj Dayal,Ankit Kumar Trivedi,Anuj Dayal

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.

(Order on Impleadment Application No. 1 of 2023)

1. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that due to

inadvertence he could not implead Ratnesh Pathak as a

necessary party in the array of applicants.

2. The application is allowed.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant is permitted to carry out

necessary amendments in the array of applicants during course

of the day.

(Order on Petition)

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. and

perused the record.

2. In view of order proposed to be passed, issuance of notice to

opposite party no.2 is dispensed with.

3. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been

filed with the prayer to quash the impugned summoning order

dated 8.2.2023, bailable warrant order dated 27.3.2023 and

entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 20/23/2022, under

Sections 498A,323,504 I.P.C. & Section 3/4 of t

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