Skip to content


Ramhit Lodhi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation

Court

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Decided On

Appellant

Ramhit Lodhi

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt:


w.p.no.3130/2010 4.7.2012 shri shivendra pandey, counsel for petitioner. shri vijay pandey, dy.a.g., for respondent nos.1 to 3. i.a.no.8372/2012. by order dated 16.2.2012 this court directed respondent nos.1 & 2 to get the case registered regarding suspicion alleged and to get the same investigated by the c.i.d.status report of the investigation was directed to be filed within a period of two months. by this application the respondents are seeking further four months time to submit status report. from the perusal of application, we find that on 27.4.2012, the additional director general of police (cid) bhopal appointed an investigating officer, but it appears that in spite of lapse of nearabout two months there is no progress. considering the seriousness of the matter, we allow further a month's time to the respondents to submit the status report, as directed by this court on 16.2.2012. for this purpose, we direct that this case be listed for hearing on 8.8.2012. (krishn kumar lahoti) (smt.vimla jain) judge judge m.

Judgment:


W.P.No.3130/2010 4.7.2012 Shri Shivendra Pandey, counsel for petitioner.

Shri Vijay Pandey, Dy.A.G., for respondent nos.1 to 3.

I.A.No.8372/2012.

By order dated 16.2.2012 this Court directed respondent nos.1 & 2 to get the case registered regarding suspicion alleged and to get the same investigated by the C.I.D.Status report of the investigation was directed to be filed within a period of two months.

By this application the respondents are seeking further four months time to submit status report.

From the perusal of application, we find that on 27.4.2012, the Additional Director General of Police (CID) Bhopal appointed an Investigating Officer, but it appears that in spite of lapse of nearabout two months there is no progress.

Considering the seriousness of the matter, we allow further a month's time to the respondents to submit the status report, as directed by this Court on 16.2.2012.

For this purpose, we direct that this case be listed for hearing on 8.8.2012.

(Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Smt.Vimla Jain) JUDGE JUDGE M.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //