Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SATYA VIR AND ANOTHER versus STATE OF U.P. THRU' SECY. U.P. SECTRIATE LKW. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Satya Vir And Another v. State Of U.P. Thru' Secy. U.P. Sectriate Lkw. And Others - CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. 10515 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 4212 (7 October 2005)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Court No. 2.

Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 10515 of 2005

Satya Vir and another         Vs.         State of U.P. and others

-------------

Hon'ble Imtiyaz Murtaza, J.

Hon'ble G.P. Srivastava, J.  

Supplementary affidavit filed today shall be placed on the record.

We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A.

This writ petition is filed against the first information report lodged against the petitioners being Case Crime No. 224 of 2005 under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 332 I.P.C., P.S. Surajpur, district Gautam Budh Nagar. The allegations against the petitioners are that on 26.9.2005 they had entered some over-writing in the public documents. The petitioners have challenged this F.I.R. on the ground that the petitioners are not getting benefit by the addition of certain words mentioned in the report. The petitioner no. 1 was not present at the place of occurrence and in support of this he filed document that he was not present at the time of occurrence. Petitioner no. 2 is an old person aged about 70 years. It is further submitted that, in fact, the informant had demanded Rs. 500/- as illegal bribe from the petitioner no. 2 and when he declined to pay this amount, this report is lodged to harass them. A perusal of the F.I.R. indicates commission of cognizable offence. It is the matter of investigation that whether the petitioner no. 1 is present at the time of occurrence or not. It is further submitted that according to U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act the over-writing alleged to have been made is immaterial. In view of the above F.I.R. in question, prima facie, discloses commission of cognizable offence. No interference is called for by this Court.

The writ petition is dismissed.

However, it is provided that in case the petitioners appear or are produced before the court concerned and apply for bail in the aforesaid case crime, their bail prayer shall be dealt with as per the seven Judges' decision of this Court dated 15.10.2004 passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 2154 of 1995 (Smt. Amarawati and another Versus State of U.P.) reported in 2004 (57) ALR 390.

Dated : 7.10.2005

S.B.


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.