Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Neutral Citations
2010 AHC 101513
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Acts
  • Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 447, 120B IPC,
  • Section 91 Cr.P.C.
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Neutral Citations
2010 AHC 101513
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Acts
  • Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 447, 120B IPC,
  • Section 91 Cr.P.C.
To access the original judgment, please Sign In or Subscribe.

    Moti Singh Sikarwar v. State Of U.P. & Another

    Court No. - 50

    Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 15383 of 2010

    Petitioner :- Moti Singh Sikarwar Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Another Petitioner Counsel :- Dharmendra Singhal Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate

    Hon'ble S.C. Agarwal,J.

    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the

    State.

    There is no need to issue notice to respondent no. 2 since the case

    before the trial court is based on charge-sheet submitted by the police.

    This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to quash the impugned

    order dated 9.7.2010 passed by learned Special Chief Judicial

    Magistrate, Agra in Case No. 1247 of 2008, State Vs. Moti Singh and

    others, under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 447, 120B IPC, P.S. New

    Agra, District-Agra and order dated 11.8.2010 passed by learned

    Sessions Judge, Agra in Criminal Revision No. Nil of 2010.

    The grievance of the petitioner is that the case against him is based

    on forgery of records and the original records are not on the file of the

    trial court and application under Section 91 Cr.P.C. was moved for

    summoning the original record, which has been dismissed by the

    Magistrate and the revision filed by the petitioner was dismissed on the

    ground that the same was not maintainable against interlocutory order.

    Learned AGA has no objection, if the original record was ordered to

    be summoned at the stage of trial.

    The writ petition is allowed. The impugned orders dated 9.7.2010

    and 11.8.2010 are quashed. The trial court is directed to summon the

    original record before it at the stage of charge to consider whether the

    charge should be framed against the petitioner or not.

    Order Date :- 20.8.2010 KU

    Neutral Citation No. - 2010:AHC:101513

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    Moti Singh Sikarwar v. State Of U.P. & Another
    (Aug 20, 2010)