REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

RAM BABOO BANSAL Appellant

V/S

STATE OF WEST BENGAL Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

MATHURA PRASAD AND ORS. VS. STATE OF U.P. [REFERRED TO]
PEETHAMBARAN VS. STATE OF KERALA [REFERRED TO]
H N RISHBUD VS. STATE OF DELHI [REFERRED TO]
AMAR NATH VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
MADHU LIMAYE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
MURARI LAL VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HARYANA VS. BHAJAN LAL [REFERRED TO]
AJIT SAVANT MAJAGVAI VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [REFERRED TO]
K CHANDRASEKHAR MARIAM RASHEEDA S K SHARMA S NAMBI NARAYANAN D SASI KUMARAN 1 THE DIRECTOR CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION VS. STATE OF KERALA [REFERRED TO]
ALAMGIR VS. STATENCT DELHI [REFERRED TO]
HASANBHAI VALIBHAI QURESHI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]
KISHAN LAL VS. DHARMENDRA BAFNA [REFERRED TO]
DALIP SINGH VS. STATE OF U P [REFERRED TO]
BABUBHAI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]
RANJEET SINGH VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
VINAY TYAGI VS. IRSHAD ALI @ DEEPAK [REFERRED TO]
GIRISH KUMAR SUNEJA VS. C.B.I. [REFERRED TO]
SURESH KUMAR GOYAL VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
VINUBHAI HARIBHAI MALAVIYA VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]
M/S NEEHARIKA INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
LUCKOSE ZACHARIAH @ ZAK VS. JOSEPH JOSEPH [REFERRED TO]
SERIOUS FRAUD INVESTIGATION OFFICE VS. SAHARA HOUSING INVESTMENT CORPORATION LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
SIDDHARTH MUKESH BHANDARI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. DR. MAROTI S/O KASHINATH PIMPALKAR [REFERRED TO]
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION VS. ARYAN SINGH ETC. [REFERRED TO]
CHANDRU DEO SINGH VS. PROKASH CHANDRA BOSE ALIAS CHABI BOSE [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Facts of the case:- 1. Opposite party no. 2, Smt. Radha Bansal lodged a written complaint dtd. 2/1/2021 with the Inspector-In-Charge, Asansol Police Station and the same was treated as the F.I.R. thereby giving rise to the instant proceeding being Asansol South Police Station case No. 03 of 2021 dtd. 2/1/2021 under Sec. 420/467/468/471/406/120B of the Indian Penal Code (for short IPC).

(2.) In the written complaint it was alleged inter alia that Mr. Jay Prakash Bansal (husband of opposite party no. 2) (for short J.P. Bansal) since deceased along with his brothers were dealing with a business styled as Mining Associates Pvt. Ltd. Atwal Nagars, Garai Road, Asansol and during his lifetime he executed a 'will' on 3/3/2015 in respect of his 13.86% share of the aforesaid business in favour of the defacto complainant to enjoy the share of his business in her life time and after that his son Anish Bansal was to become the owner of the said share.

(3.) After death of her husband, J.P. Bansal on 6/2/2018, the defacto complainant claimed herself as legal share holder of the business of her husband in the said company. At that time one Sanjay Bansal son of Ram Babu Bansal, one of the partners of the said business produced one letter of Gift dtd. 1/1/2018 reportedly executed by the husband of the defacto complainant in his favour and claimed himself to be the owner of the shares held by J.P. Bansal. Later on, the defacto complainant arranged to verify the signature of her husband on the letter of Gift dtd. 1/1/2018 by Private Forensic Document and Fingerprint Expert who opined that the signature on the letter of Gift dtd. 1/1/2018 and share Transfer Form are forged one and thereby accusation of commission of offence of cheating and misappropriation of property was levelled against the alleged persons.

Click here to view full judgment.

RAM BABOO BANSAL Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address