DO Retrieved.asp(3)

-1-FIR No. 250/1995PS- R.K. PuramState v. R.K. Puram

05-02-2015

PW 22: Ms. Deepa Verma W/o Shri Deepak Raj Soni, Deputy Director, FSL, Rohini, Delhi

On S.A.

On 24-10-1996 I was posted as Sr. Scientific Officer

(Documents) at FSL, Malviya Nagar. I am M.Sc in chemistry from

Meerut university, Meerut. I have more than 24 years of

experience in the field of documents examination. I had reported

lacs of exhibits and deposed in approx. 800 courts.

On 24-10-1996 the present case was marked to me for

examination of documents. The documents which were examined

in this case were signatures and writings on cheques, share

transfer forms etc. which were the questioned documents marked

as Q1 to Q14 with sub-markings. The standard/specimen writings

and signatures of one Ramesh Gupta were also received for

comparison which were marked as S1 to S-44, S-19/1 and S-19/2.

After thorough forensic examination, I furnished my

report FSL-95/D-308 dated 24-10-1996 and the same is

Ex.PW22/1 bearing my signature at point A. In the said report, I

opined that similarities in writing habits of the writings marked Q1

to Q14 and Q14/1 with the standard writings marked S-1 to S-19,

S-19/1, S-19/2 and S-22, S-44, which led me to the opinion of

common authorship. The details of examination and analysis is

mentioned in my above said report. However, on rest of the items

-2-

it was not possible to express definite opinion.

XXXXX by accused accused Ramesh Gupta.

Nil ; opportunity given.

XXXXX By Dayanand Arya, Counsel for accused Vinod Malik.


XXXXX By Tej Narain, Legal Aid Counsel for accused Vinod Kumar

Aggarwal and Sandeep Kumar.


XXXXXX By Shri Rajeev Jain, counsel for accused Ajay Kalia,

Upender Sehrawat and Kanwar Sain.


RO & AC

(VIVEK KUMAR GULIA) Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (South)

Saket Courts, New Delhi/05-02-2015

-1-FIR No. 281/2006PS- Crime BranchState v. Anil Kumar Dhawan

05-02-2015

PW 19 : Shri Arun Kumar S/o Shri Sube Singh, aged about 30 years R/o Village Jouri Khurd, District Gurgaon, Haryana.

On S.A.

In the year 2005 I was unemployed. My foofaji, Vijay

Kumar, came to our house at above mentioned address and told

that both of his sons, namely, Ranvir and Ravi, were getting

employment in Aakashwani Bhawan. He told that accused,

present in the court today (correctly identified by the witness),

was providing the said job. My parents also asked for my

employment and told my Foofaji to talk to accused in this regard.

I went to Anil Kumar Bhawan and he demanded Rs.1.5 Lac for

employment for the post of LDC. I returned back to my house and

informed my parents about the same. My parents took loan of Rs.

One lac. I went to accused, who called me in Aakashwani Bhawan.

I along with accused went inside Aakashwani Bhawan and I

handed over Rs. One Lac to him and accused filled one form and

got my signatures on it. He told me that he would intimate about

the job after some days. After few days, he showed me one I-card

and appointment letter pertaining to myself and told that soon I

will get the job. I was also got medically examined at Charak

Palika Hospital. However, after many days he was

-2-

ignoring on one pretext or the other. Lastly, I along with other

victims, namely, Inderjeet, Ranvir, Ravi, Krishan, Subhash and

Sunil, took I-cards and appointment letters from the accused and

lodged the complaint against him in Crime Branch Office, R.K.

Puram. We had given the I-cards and appointment letters to the

police.

(At this stage, five documents are shown to the witness and

witness stated that the same were given by accused and he had

signed on those documents. The documents are collectively

Ex.PW19/1 bearing the signature of witness at point A on each

page.)

(At this stage, one original I-card is shown to the witness and

witness stated that the same was given by accused. The I-card is

Ex.PW19/2 bearing the signature of witness at point A.)

(At this stage, one appointment letter is shown to the witness and

witness stated that the same was given by accused. The original

appointment letter is Ex.PW19/3.)

(At this stage, Ld. APP seeks permission to cross examine the

witness as he is not disclosing the complete facts of the case.

Heard. Allowed.

XXXXXX By Shri Anil Kumar Paswan, Ld. APP for the State

It is correct that my foofa ji told that accused was

working in Aakashwani Bhawan as Assistant. I had handed over

the appointment letter, which was photostate copy as well as

-3-

original, to the IO.

XXXXXX By Shri D.K. Sharma, counsel for accused

I have studied up to 12th standard. Accused had shown

the advertisement about the said vacancy in the newspaper. I had

not stated about this fact to the police. VOL: It was not asked

from me. I did not handed over the copy of said advertisement

to police. My foofa ji is residing at Bagdola, Delhi. I know accused

through my foofaji only. I did not knew accused prior to that. It is

wrong to suggest that accused had not demanded the amount of

Rs. 1.5 Lac from me. I had not stated to police that I was

medically examined at Charak Palika Hospital. VOL: As it was not

asked from me. It is correct that Ex.PW19/1 is not completely

filled. It is correct that their is no seal or name of any official on

Ex.PW19/1. I had not taken any receipt regarding payment of Rs.

One Lac to accused. Only I myself had went to Aakashwani

Bhawan for payment of Rs. One Lac to accused. I was called by

accused through mobile phone. I has not stated to the police

about the fact of calling me through phone. No acknowledgment

was given regarding delivery of I-card and appointment letter. It is

wrong to suggest that accused had not given any I-card and

appointment letter to me. It is correct that I have received Rs.

75,000/- out of said amount of Rs. One Lac from my foofaji

(complainant). I had not given any written complaint to the crime

branch. It is wrong to suggest that I never met accused or that I

gave Rs. One Lac to my foofa ji for my job or that I had not made

the payment to accused. It is correct that the photograph put on

-4-

Ex.PW19/3 bears my signature at point A. It is wrong to suggest

that the photographs were not taken by the accused but by my

foofa ji. I had not handed over documents of my educational

qualification to police. It is wrong to suggest that I am deposing

falsely just for obtaining Rs.25,000/- from my foofaji.

RO & AC



CC No. 4211/2014PS- Sangam ViharSuman v. Seema Devi

05-02-2015Present : Ms. Suman, complainant in person with counsel Shri

Arpit Sharma.Accused Seema Devi on bail with counsel Shri L.A Vashist.

Matter put up before this court pursuant to order

dated 23-01-2015 passed by the appellate court of Ld. ASJ-03,

South, Saket Courts, Delhi, for proceedings further with the trial of

this case or to assign it to any other court of competent

jurisdiction.

Put up for consideration on 11-02-2015 at 2 PM.



FIR No. 281/2006PS- R.K. PuramState v. Anil Kumar Dhawan

05-02-2015Present : Shri Anil Kumar Paswan, Ld. APP for the State.

Accused on bail with counsel Shri D.K. Sharma.

Fresh vakalatnama filed on behalf of accused.

PW19 Shri Arun Kumar examined and discharged.

PW Shri Sushil Kumar failed to turn up despite service

of summons. Issue BW in the sum of Rs.5000/- with one surety in

the like amount against him for the next date of hearing.

Put up for PE on 28-04-2015.



FIRNo.200/99PSKotlaMubarakpur

05.02.2015 Statevs.AshokParshadStatementofaccusedAshokParshadsonoflateSh.JanviPrasadage:59years,R/o.H.No.1,AwasVikasColony,Gorakhpur,Delhi,u/s.313Cr.P.CWithoutOath.

Q1. IthascomeinevidencethatDr.MammenChandy(PW7)hadwrittenaletterdated05.01.1999MarkAtoSecretary,MedicalCouncilofIndia,mentioningthatlettersdated03.06.98(MarkC/Ex.PW12/C)andletterdated 05.06.1998 (Mark D/Ex.PW12/D) addressed to Honble Secretary,RACP,werenotwrittenbyhim.Whatyouhavetosay?A. Icametoknowaboutitonlyaftertheregistrationofthiscase.Q2. ItisfurthercomeinevidencethatPW1Dr.K.K.ArorastatedthathereceivedaforesaidletterfromPW7andoninquiryitwasfoundthataforesaidlettersdated03.06.98and5.6.98,purportedlyissuedbySecretary,MCI,Sh.MammenChandy,ontheletterheadofMCI,wereforgedsinceMCIhadneveroperatedfromtheaddressH73A,NDSEI,NewDelhi110024,givenonsaidletterheadsandtelephonenumbersmentionedthereonwerealsonotusedbyMCIatanypointoftime.Further,hementionedthathegaveacomplaintEx.PW1/1topolicealongwithphotocopyofdifferentdocumentsMarkAtoMarkE,onthebasisofwhichFIRwasregistered.Whatyouhavetosay?A. Icametoknowaboutitaftertheregistrationofthiscase.Q3. ItisfurthercomeinevidencethatonthebasisofrukkasentbySIOmbirSingh,FIREx.PW3/AinthiscasewasregisteredbyPW3ASIPratapSinghandfurtherhemadeendorsement on the rukkaEx.PW3/B.Whatyouhavetosay?A. Iamnotawareaboutthis.Q4. It is further come in evidence that PW4 Sh. Mehtab AlamdisclosedthatgroundfloorofH73A,SouthExtn.PartI,NewDelhiwasgivenonrenttoafirmfrom1993to1997andafterthatitremainedinhispossession.Whatyouhavetosay?A. Ihadneverresidedintheaforesaidproperty.However,onefirmnamelyTrikayaInternationalwasoperatingfromthesaidpropertyat the

relevanttimeandmybrotherwasoneofitspartnertill1997.Q5. ItisfurthercomeinevidencethatPW5Sh.GolakNarainSewakPandeytestifiedthatheinformedpoliceofficialofCrimeBranchthatyouwereresidinginH.No.1,AwasVikasColony,Gorakhpur.Whatyouhavetosay?A. Itistrue.Q6. It is further come in evidence that in response to letterEx.PW12/EofIOPW12InspectorPratapSingh,replyreceivedfromIndianCouncilofMedicalResearchEx.PW8/AtotheeffectthatyouwereneitheranadvisorinICMRnorremainedassociatedwithitinanyposition.Whatyouhavetosay?A. ItiscorrectthatIhadneverremainedassociatedwithICMR.Q.7. It is further come in evidence that in response to letterEx.PW12/F of IO PW12 Inspector Pratap Singh, reply received fromDirectorIndianNational ScienceAcademyEx.PW2/AgivenbyPW2Sh.S.P.Sharmatotheeffect thatyouwerenotafellowoftheacademyandShreeDhanwantariwasneverawardedtoyouin1995.Whatyouhavetosay?A. Itiscorrect.Q.8. ItisfurthercomeinevidencethatinresponsetoletterwrittenbyIOPW12Inspector PratapSingh, a replywasreceivedfromMinistryofDefenceEx.PW6/AgivenbyPW6Sh.G.B.SinghtotheeffectthatyouwereneverawardedPadamshreein1984andPadambhushanin1991.Whatyouhavetosay?A. Itiscorrect.Q.9. It is further come in evidence that on the request of IOsentthroughletterMarkPW12/P,PW10Sh.N.C.Jha,beingpostedasAssistantDirectorInterpolDelhi,sentthecopyofreportreceivedfromtheconcernedagencyregardingyoualongwithhis letterEx.PW10/A.Whatyouhavetosay?A. Iamnotawareaboutthesaidreport.Q.10. It is further come in evidence that in response to letterEx.PW12/E written by IO PW12 Inspector Pratap Singh, a reply wasreceivedfromDirectorofNutritionFoundationofIndiaEx.PW11/Atothe

effect that you were never the member of Advisory board of NutritionFoundationofIndia.Whatyouhavetosay?A. Itiscorrect.Q.11. ItisfurthercomeinevidencethatyouwerearrestedfromPatnavidearrestmemoEx.PW9/AandpersonalsearchmemoEx.PW9/B.Further,yourdisclosurestatementEx.PW9/Cwasalsorecorded.Whatyouhavetosay?A. Itiscorrect.Q.12. It is furthercomeinevidencethatIOPW12InspectorPratapSingh took your specimen handwriting in seven sheets Ex.PW12/A on19.02.2001andontensheetsEx.PW12/Son17.09.2002andagainontensheets Ex.PW12/T on 18.09.2002. Further, in response to letters of IO,RACPsenttwooriginallettersEx.PW12/CandEx.PW12/Dalongwiththeirreply Ex.PW12/B. Further, in response to email sent by IO to GeneralMedical Council, Glasgow, email Ex.PW12/G was received alongwithattachedfileEx.PW12/H.Further, inresponsetoemailofIOEx.PW12/I,emailwasreceivedfromRCPSEx.PW12/J.Further,IOreceivedtwolettersdated22.11.97and30.07.98Ex.PW12/K,purportedlywrittenbyProf.K.K.Kapoor,bypostandcopyofFaxdated03.05.1999and10.09.2000sentbyyou and Sh. Ashola respectively are mark 12/L and 12/M respectively.Further, the original letter dated 20.04.2001 purportedly written by ShAsholaPrasadEx.PW12/Mandcopyofletterdt.18.06.2001writtenbyhimismark12/O.Further,inresponsetoemailofIO,hereceivedemailfromRCPSGlasgowEx.PW12/R.Whatyouhavetosay?A. Myspecimenhandwriting was obtained by IOonly once atGorakhpurwhenIwasaskedtoreproducetheallegedforgedlettergivenbyDr.MammenChandyandsubsequentlymyspecimensignaturesweretakenonseveralsheets.IamnotawareaboutthecorrespondencedonebyIO.Q.13. ItisfurthercomeinevidencethathandwritingexpertPW13Sh.AmiLalDakshgavehisreportEx.PW13/Atotheeffectthatyouhadwrittenquestioneddocumentsi.e.alettersdated03.06.1998,05.06.1998,22.12.1997,31.07.1998,03.05.1999,10.09.2000and20.04.2001,purportedlywrittenbySecretary,MCI,Prof.K.K.Kapoor,AsholiaPrasadandAshulaPrasad.Whatyouhavetosay?

A. The handwriting expert has given wrong opinion. The firstreportwasgiveninnegativeandthe2ndreportcamethreeyearsafterfilingofthiscaseintheCourt.Q.14. Whytheprosecutionwitnesseshavedeposedagainstyou?A. Noonehasdeposedagainstme.Q.15. Doyouwantsayanythingelse?A. Ihadworkedfor32yearsabroadpracticingpsychiatricandaftercomingbacktoIndia,IestablishedaCharitableclinicinGorakhpurin1999.One police official namely Ombir Singh telephoned my house andthreatenedmymothertosendmetoDelhioffice.ThenIcalledbackatEOWofficeandtalktoACPTyagi.ThenIsentacomplainttoCommissionerofpoliceagainstACPTyagiandOmbirSinghfortheirmisconduct. Amonthafter,InspectorPratapSinghcametomyplaceatGorakhpurandcollectedmyhandwritingsampleoneightsheets,copyofmypassport,mycertificatesandmedicalregistration.NoneofthesedocumentsmentionedmynameasA.S.J.Prasad,hascomeintheforgedletters.MydateofbirthshownintheCVbroughtbyIOwasalsowrong.IhadalsoinformedthatsincebeginningIhavepracticedasapsychiatricinsevencountrieswhereasthequalificationshowninthedocumentsbroughtbyIOwasrelatedtohaematology.IalsoinformedthatIhadneverstayedatanyplaceinNOIDA.Ihavebeenfalselyimplicatedinthiscase.Q.16. Doyouwanttoleaddefenceevidence?A. No. RO&AC

(VIVEKKUMARGULIA)ChiefMetropolitanMagistrate(South)SaketCourts,NewDelhi/05.02.2015

Certifiedthattheabovestatementofaccusedhasbeenrecordedby undersigned personally and it contains the true and full account ofexplanationgivenbyhim.

(VIVEKKUMARGULIA)ChiefMetropolitanMagistrate(South)SaketCourts,NewDelhi/05.02.2015

FIRNo.380/01P.S.HauzKhasStatevs.MadanjeetSingh&Ors.

05.02.2015Present: Sh.AnilKumarPaswan,APPfortheState.

AccusedSwamiVikramanandonbailwithcounselSh.RajivDayal.AccusedSurenderKumarAroraandR.P.Prasadonbail.ProceedingsagainstaccusedMadanjeetSinghabatedvide orderdated1972013.AccusedJyoti Prasadconvictedandsentencedvideorder dated21092004.AccusedY.L.Sachdeva,AtmaRamGupta,JaiveerNagar andR.R.Sakiadischargedvideorderdated02092014.

File is in Sessions Court where next date of hearing is10.02.2015. In view of this, put up for further proceedings on21.03.2015.

(VIVEKKUMARGULIA)ChiefMetropolitanMagistrate(South)

SaketCourts,NewDelhi/05.02.2015

FIRNo.213/06P.S.LodhiColony(EOW)

05.02.2015 Statevs.SriNiwasSharma&Ors.Present: Sh.AnilKumarPaswan,APPfortheState.

AccusedS.N.SharmaonbailwithcounselSh.UdaiRaj.AccusedRakeshJainisabsent.ProxycounselforaccusedRakeshJain.SonofcomplainantinpersonwithcounselSh.NiteshRana.

Application for exemption frompersonal appearance has beenmovedonbehalfofaccusedRakeshJain.Heard.Inviewofreasonsstatedintheapplication,sameisallowed.

ItissubmittedbycomplainantaswellasaccusedS.N.Sharmathatall theformalitiesforexecutingnecessarydocumentstotransferthetitleofpropertymeasuring2772.305sq.ydscomprisinginkhasrano.565,VillageBisnoli,TehsilDadri,U.P,infavourofcomplainantSh.A.K.Govilhave been completed and date may be fixed for registration of titledocumentsintheofficeofconcernedregistrar.Onbeingasked,itisstatedthat11.02.2015issuitedtoboththesides.Accordingly,complainantaswellas accused S.N. Sharma are directed to appear in person before theconcernedregistrarforregistrationoftitledocumentsofaforesaidpropertyinfavourofcomplainant.ThesaleconsiderationwouldbedeemedtohavebeenpaidbycomplainantinviewofSupremeCourtdirectionsasfixeddepositreceiptinthesumofRs.1,02,57,510/hasalreadybeenplacedonrecordon16.12.2014andthisfactbeincorporatedinthetitledocumentsaccordingly.

Copy of registered title documents be placed on record onNDOH.

Putupforfurtherproceedingson09.03.2015.



DeokinandanChaturvedivs.RajShreeGroup

05.02.2015Present: DH/oneofthevictiminperson.

JD/accusedSriNiwasSharmainpersonwithcounselSh. UdaiRaj.

ItissubmittedonbehalfofpartiesthatmatterislikelytobesettledandsettlementamountwouldbepaidinMarch,2015.

Inviewofthis,putupwithStatecaseon09.03.2015.



CCNo.235/1/12P.S.HauzKhasSantoshKumarBaglavs.M/sMausmiBhattacharjee

05.02.2015Present: None.

Statusreport filedonbehalf of IOSINitinKumarto theeffectthathehasbeenhandedovertheinvestigationtwodaysbackandFSLreportisawaited.

Earlier report hascomethat inconnectedmatter FIRNo.128/05 P.S. Defence Colony, cancellation report is pendingconsiderationintheCourtofLd.CMM,SouthEast,NewDelhiandinvestigationincaseFIRNo.21/05ispendingawaitingtheFSLresult.

Inviewofthis,putupforfurtherproceedingson01.05.2015.



FIRNo.168/11P.S.CrimeBranchStatevs.VimalKumar


Accusedisabsent.Complainantinperson.

It isobservedthataccusedwasabsentonthelastdate.Inviewofthis,bailbondofaccusedstandsforfeited.IssueNBWagainstaccusedwithnoticetohissuretyforNDOH.




FIRNo.207/06P.S.MalviyaNagar(EOW)Statevs.Sanjay&Anr.


Boththeaccusedonbail.

ThebounddownwitnessPWSh.AnilKumarfailedtoturnup.IssueB/WagainsthiminthesumofRs.5,000/withonesuretyinthelikeamount.Further,heisdirectedtoproduceoriginalGPA.

DespiteexecutionofB/W,Ct.Dharampalfailedtoturnup.Consideringthat all thepoliceofficials arebusyin urgentduty inconnectionwithcomingassemblyelections,nofurtheradverseorderispassedagainsthim.IssuefreshB/WagainstCt.DharampalinthesumofRs.5,000/withonesuretyinthelikeamount.

PWSISureshKumarispresent.HeadmittedhismistakeforhisnonappearanceonthelastdatedespiteexecutionofB/W.Intheinterestofjustice,NBWorderedtobeissuedagainsthimiscancelled.ItissubmittedbyLd.APPfortheStatethatsinceSISureshKumarisIO,hebedischargedandhistestimonywouldberecordedafterthetestimonyofotherwitnesses.

PutupforPEon24.04.2015.



FIRNo.108/11P.S.R.K.Puram(AATS)Statevs.Vikram@Ravi&Ors.


AccusedVikram@Raviisabsent.AccusedBishanSinghonbailwithcounselSh.S.K.Soni.AccusedNiwas@Sunilacquittedvideorderdt.25.11.2013.

ItisobservedthataccusedVikram@Raviwasabsentonthelastdate.Inviewofthis,hisbailbondisforfeited.IssueNBWagainsthimwithnoticetohissuretyforNDOH.

Earlier,ithadbeenreportedthataccusedVikram@RaviisinJCinthreecasesinRohiniCourt. Inviewofthis, P/WbealsoissuedagainstaccusedVikram@RaviforNDOH.

Summons sent to PW Ct. Amit Kumar and HC ArvindKumar have been served but they have sent request in writing toexempt their personal appearance on account of urgent duty inconnectionwithcomingassemblyelections.Inviewofthis,theybesummonedafreshforNDOH.




FIRNo.372/1998P.S.VasantKunj(CB)Statevs.K.N.Ramchandran&Anr.


AccusedVinayTyagionbail.AccusedK.N.Ramachandranisabsent.

DespiteexecutionofB/W,IOSIJ.P.Singhfailedtoturnup.Consideringthat all thepoliceofficials arebusyin urgentduty inconnectionwithcomingassemblyelections,nofurtheradverseorderispassedagainsthim.IssuefreshB/WagainstIOSIJ.P.SinghinthesumofRs.5,000/withonesuretyinthelikeamountforNDOH.



SaketCourts,NewDelhi/05.02.2015Lateron:

Sh.DeepakTyagi,counselforboththeaccusedappearedandrequestedforchangeofdate.Asprayedfor,dateischangedto16.03.2015.Thedategivenas11.03.2015iscancelled.



CCNo.22/1/SCentralBankofIndiavs.AnupSinghTanwar&Ors.

05.02.2015Statement of Sh. Rajpal Singh, Advocate, D/1789/07, Chamber no.579,PatialaHouseCourts,NewDelhi.W.O.

Iamcounselforpetitionerandhavebeendulyauthorizedtomake statement on its behalf. As per instructions from thepetitioner/CentralBankofIndia,Imaykindlybeallowedtowithdrawthepresentpetitionwithlibertytofilethefreshpetitioninaccordancewithlaw.

RO&AC(VIVEKKUMARGULIA)

ChiefMetropolitanMagistrate(South)SaketCourts,NewDelhi/05.02.2015

FIRNo.359/13P.S.HauzKhasStatevs.RanveerSinghRana


AccusedonpolicebailwithcounselSh.ShailenderSharma.

Freshvakalatnamafiledforaccused.Copyofchargesheetsuppliedtoaccused.Anapplicationforbailu/s437Cr.P.Cmoved.Heard.Since

the offence is bailable in nature, accused Ranveer Singh Rana isadmittedtobailonhisfurnishingapersonalbondinthesumofRs.50,000/withonesuretyinthelikeamount.BailbondfurnishedandacceptedtillNDOH.

Putupforscrutinyofdocumentson16.04.2015.



FIRNo.279/03P.S.LodhiColony(CB)Statevs.PradeepKumar


AccusedinpersonwithcounselSh.SudhirKumar.Suretyinperson.

AnapplicationforcancellationofNBWmovedbyaccused.Heard. In view of the reasons given in the application, same isallowed.

In view of previous order, issue B/W in the sum of Rs.5,000/eachagainstPWPoojaShashiandBalbirwithonesuretyinthelikeamount.




FIRNo.180/08P.S.EOWStatevs.AvdheshMittal


AccusedAvdheshMittalonbailwithcounselSh.S.S.Wani.AccusedNarenderKumarChauhanonbailwithcounselSh.VikasArora.Complainantinpersonwithproxycounsel.

NoticesenttoIOforclarificationbuthehassentrequestinwritingtoexempthispersonalappearanceonaccountofurgentdutyinconnectionwithcomingassemblyelections.Inviewofthis,freshnoticebeissuedtoIOforNDOH.

On joint request, matter is adjourned for arguments onapplicationu/s173(8)Cr.P.Candforsummoningofotherpersonsasaccusedfor23.03.2015.



M.No.46/1/MAvdheshvs.RajenderChhabra

05.02.2015Present: Applicant/accusedinpersonwithcounsel.

Respondentinperson.

PutupwithStatecaseon23.03.2015.



FIRNo.200/99P.S.K.M.PurStatevs.AshokParshad


Accusedonbail.

StatementofaccusedU/s313Cr.P.Crecorded.Hehasoptednottoleaddefenceevidence.

Putupforfinalargumentson20.02.2015.

