REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

PUSHPENDRA Appellant

V/S

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

CHITRESH KUMAR CHOPRA VS. STATE (GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI) [REFERRED TO]
AMIT KAPUR VS. RAMESH CHANDER AND ANOTHER [REFERRED TO]
PRAVEEN PRADHAN VS. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL AND ANOTHERS [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF PUNJAB VS. IQBAL SINGH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF WEST BENGAL VS. ORILALJAISWAL [REFERRED TO]
NEYVELI LIGNITE CORPORATION LIMITED VS. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER CUDDALORE [REFERRED TO]
RAMESH KUMAR VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [REFERRED TO]
SANJU SANJAY SINGH SENGAR VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
SURENDER VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
KISHORI LAL VS. STATE OF M P [REFERRED TO]
SONTI RAMA KRISHNA VS. SONTI SHANTI SREE [REFERRED TO]
CHITRESH KUMAR CHOPRA VS. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI [REFERRED TO]
AMALENDU PAL ALIAS JHANTU VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [REFERRED TO]
GANGULA MOHAN REDDY VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
M MOHAN VS. STATE BY THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE [REFERRED TO]
UDE SINGH VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under Sec. 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking the following reliefs:-

(2.) By this application the applicant has sought quashment of FIR in Crime No. 520/20223, registered at Police Station Hata, District Damoh for offence under Sec. 306 of IPC.

(3.) It is submitted by counsel for applicant that during the pendency of this application charges have been framed. However, the same have not been challenged by filing any revision. Thus, it is submitted that merely because the charges have been framed during the pendency of this application, therefore, this application would not render infructuous and still it can be decided on merits.

Click here to view full judgment.

PUSHPENDRA Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address