This High Court dismissed Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions challenging orders taking cognizance against accused-petitioners for alleged forgery of medical reports, upholding findings that sufficient material existed to initiate proceedings.
Disposal connecting file order
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 2738/2016
Dr Sanjay Sharma S/o Ganesh Dutt, B/c Brahmin R/o 5 Kha 14, Housing Board, Shastri Nagar, Jaipur
Accused-Petitioner
Versus
1.State Of Rajasthan through PP.
Non-Petitioner
Complainant-Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 2904/2013
Both are B/c Jat, R/o Village Sahrai Police Station Deeg, District Bharatpur (Raj.)
Accused-Petitioner
Versus
Complainant-Respondent
| For Petitioner(s) | : Mr. Anood Dhand |
|---|---|
| Mr. Suresh Sahni | |
| For State | : Mr. Arvind Kumar, PP |
| For Complainant(s) | : Mr. Raj Kumar Goyal |
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI
Judgment / Order
30/07/2019
(2 of 3)
[CRLMP-2738/2016]
Revision Petition filed by the petitioners were dismissed and the order dated 01.05.2002 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deeg, District Bharatpur, whereby Court took cognizance against the petitioners, was upheld.
(3 of 3)
[CRLMP-2738/2016]
370 ” has held that if forgery is committed prior to that document being produced or given in evidence for proceeding in any Court, victim would have a right to initiate proceedings against the person who has forged the document.
(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J
AMIT KUMAR /43-44
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the concurrent orders taking cognizance against the petitioners for alleged forgery of medical reports.
Whether the absence of evidence conclusively precluding the取下 of cognizance warrants invoking inherent powers.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Iqbal Singh Marwah & Anr. vs. Meenakshi Marwah & Anr.Explained¶36
Iqbal Singh Marwah & Anr. vs. Meenakshi Marwah & Anr. (2005) 4 Supreme Court Cases 370
Dr Sanjay Sharma
Surnam
Bijendra
State Of Rajasthan
Mahendra Singh
Pankaj Bhandari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
