Single judge disposed of a review application filed by a petitioner against an order dated 16.10.2017, directing that the order shall not impede pending or future criminal or civil proceedings.
The order dated 16.10.2017 shall not come in the way of criminal proceedings or any other proceedings initiated against the petitioner's husband.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~17
Through: Mr. Abir Phukan, Ms. Anitha Mathai Muthirenthy and Ms. Sonali Jain, Advocates.
versus
RESERVE BANK OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. K.S. Parihar and Mr. Kuldeep S. Parihar, Advocates for R-1.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
O R D E R
CM. APPL.39578/2017
petitioner‟s salary account.
3.1 In sum, the petitioner was aggrieved not only by the act of forgery but also by the fact that she could not be called upon to bear the burden of the liability owed to respondent no.2.
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J
MAY 01, 2018/cks
Sneha Sawai
Reserve Bank of India
Rajiv Shakdher
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
