Anonymous
02 March 2010 at 00:28
case no 787 oF 1997
order 29.8.1997
case Ramesh V. Laxmi bai agenst Rulin latest
Crpc section 97 ,98 & hindu Minority Guardianship Act section.6 (a)
1997 to 2010
s.c of india latest casege name & case no. and jugment
Anonymous
01 March 2010 at 19:29
Dear Sir/Madam,
One of my client's purchased Agricultural land in Raigad Dist. Maharashtra. Now, the land was purchased in 2006 in the name of my clients wife who is a backward class farmer from Rajapur Dist. Maharashtra.
However, while purchasing the land, obtaining the 7/12 from Rajapur had become difficult & hence they submitted a fake 7/12 in the name of the concerned partie's husband's name as Section 63 of The Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 prohibits purchase of Agri Land by non farmers. On that basis, the land was duly transferred to my client's wife's name. Thereafter, my client managed to obtain genuine 7/12 from Rajapur Dist. in his wife's name.
However, now, in Feb, 2010 someone has decided to investigate into the matter (Under RTI Act) & my client fears that even though he now holds a genuine 7/12, the person who has sought information under RTI Act may try to invoke the IPC for Forgery of Documents (7/12 in this case) once he finds out about the same.
Now my concern is the following:
1) Can IPC (for forgery) be invoked in this case?
2) If yes, what would be the maximum sentence possible & what would be the likely punishment considering the facts of the case?
3) Can my client claim any defence as to non existence of ulterior motive or malice?
4) Are there any other remedies available to my client?
5) What would be the maximum punishment under the Bombay Tenancy & Agricultural Lands Act, 1948; if any?
Thank You.
Anonymous
01 March 2010 at 19:25
IN A CASE OF CHEQUE BOUNCING , COUNSEL OF ACCUSED ASSERTED THAT THE COMPLAINANT IS NOT HAVING LOAN DOCUMENT AS ACCORDING TO HIM HE HAS GIVEN LOAN TO ACCUSED AND ACCUSED HAD GIVEN HIM CHEQUE TO REPAY SUCH LOAN, WHICH WAS BOUNCED.ALSO,COMPLAINANT GIVE AN AFFIDAVIT WHICH WAS OT AS PER LAW, AS IT WAS NOT WRITTEN AT LAST THAT I HAVE NOT CONCEALED ANYTHING.THE ACCUSED COUNCIL GAVE VARIOUS CITATIONS ON SUCH AFFIDAVIT AND ALSO ON THAT CHEQUE BOUNCE WITHOUT HAVING ANY LOAN DOCUMENT IF LOAN IS GIVEN DOESN'T ATTRACT SECTION 138.BUT THE COURT GAVE JUDGMENT AGAINST ACCUSED AND SENTENCED HIM TO 6 MONTHS IMPRISONMENT.AND ALSO THE COURT DIDN'T MENTIONED ANY CITATION GIVEN BY ACCUSED COUNCIL IN HIS JUDGMENT.IS IT NOT COMPULSORY FOR COURT TO MENTION THE VARIOUS AUTHORITIES GIVEN BY THE ADVOCATES DURING ARGUMENT IN THE JUDGMENT ?????????
Anonymous
01 March 2010 at 19:07
Respected Sir,
A suit for permanent injunction's proceeding were going on in which our lawyer filled our Written Statement in which he wrote that plaintiff have illicit relation's with the local goon .Later on suit for permanent injunction was dismissed and withdrawn by the Plaintiff. But the plaintiff moved to the criminal court under IPC 500 as a defamation under section 200 . and got summons issued from MM could be without disclosing all the facts and circumstances . In the permanent injunction plaintiff once send us a legal notice for the demand of 10 lakhs and apology . But our Lawyer didn’t bothered about that as a result the plaintiff filed a suit for defamation in the court of MM. My question is that if a Civil proceeding is going on and the words which the plaintiff felt as a defamatry said in WS and the suit is withdrawn and dismissed . The suit for defamation can be maintained or cannot be maintained if maintained then under which proceeding Civil / Criminal .
Pls reply.
Anonymous
01 March 2010 at 15:30
hers my 2 question,,,, (1) kya abiyaukt parivadi se cross kar sakta hai, evidence act usko kya power deta hai, (2) kya abhiyact final bahas khud kar sakta hai.. (3) yadi usne advocate bhi kar rakha hai, aur vah bhi vaha mozud rahe, to ismain kya court object karega
giri
01 March 2010 at 13:52
prosecution cannot produce complain during the trial it is a fatal for prosecution. answer is no. please give me favourable citation on above subject.
gopinadh
01 March 2010 at 09:07
Dear Sir,
In 324 of I P C the Complainant narrated the incindent, and pw 2 turned hostile, pw3 & 4 are interested witness they corrabarated with the complainant, and pw 7 is the doctor, who explained injury but not cited in the wound certificate about the object, pw 8 is investigating officer not recovered any object from scence of offence as stated in the 161 statement.
please send the latest judjement in this regard.
Anonymous
01 March 2010 at 04:11
Ld counsels,
How contradicting statement made by complainant will be viewed by criminal court.
When the contradiction is of such a nature that the two statement cannot be fatually possible or co-exist.
Also how different versions of an incident will be viewed.
Please clarify. Thanks
Anonymous
28 February 2010 at 21:42
sir, .. .. . very very intersting, pahle bat ko samajhe pls..... jab koi bank main check ya cash jama karta hai to bank ka ek boucher bharta hai,jiske 2 bhag hote hai,ek jise bank jamakarta ko vapas karta hai, va dusre bhag ko bank chahe check ka owner kare ya disowner, apne pas rakhta hai, bank memo ki vaidyta par object karne par bank apne record se vahi memo court main prastut karta hai,. . . .. .. ... . .. ... 138 ke ek case main parivadi ne bank voucher ka vah bhag jo bank record main rahta hai,vah mul bhag court main prastut kar diya hai, ukt bhag, ya chek par bank ki koi remark ya seal nahi hai,jisse pata chale ki check bank main prastut hua ....... i think, parivadi bank main chek lekar gaya hi nahi ya gaya bhi to bank valo ne account ka koi record computer main na hone se check accept nahi kiya, kyoki account kafi din pahle se band tha, va coputri karan ke bad aise band account computer main nahi liye gaye honge....... bad main parivadi ne kisi bank karmi se santh ganth kar bank memo hasil kar liya hoga,,,,,bank memo main na to parivadi , na hi abhiyukt ke acoount no hai, va para 16 main tick hai, jismain likha hai no account/account close on advice. . .. .. ... . .. ... ab kya kanooni sthithi hai
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
supreme court ki sight se nikali ruling manya hoti hai kya
you can post your reply in english, sir,, supreme court ya high court ki websight se nikale faisle yadi print nikalkar ya cd main jama kiye jave to kya court usko accept karegi, informasion and technology act main to email ki vaidhyata ka pravdhan hai, to kya apni hi adhikarik web side ke faisle print nikal kar court manya karegi