Neena V. Patel Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Neena V. Patel vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Feb 27, 2013

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1052021

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1052021
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On: Feb 27, 2013
Subject: Banking

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Banking

Key legal issue: Banking

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Neena V. Patel

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt

1 w.p.no.2267/2013 27.2.2013 shri v.s.shroti, learned senior counsel with shri p. jain, for the petitioner. shri sanjeev kumar singh, learned panel lawyer for the respondents. petitioners claim that after death of their father they have filed complaint with regard to certain irregularities committed in operation of the bank account and dispossession of movable and immovable property and inspite of the complaint, offence is not registered by the police authorities and contending that under section 154 of cr.p.c.fir should be registered and investigation done, this writ petition has been filed. taking note of the nature of dispute that is put forth in the writ petition it is seen that dispute is a family dispute with regard to the property of petitioners.father and the complaint is made against the family members with regard to the allegations made therein. taking note of the nature of the complaint and fact that petitioners has remedy of filing private complaint where the magistrate can take cognizance of the matter and issue necessary directions to the police authorities, i am not inclined to interfere into the matter. accordingly, granting liberty to the petitioners to take recours.to the remedy available of filing private complaint before the magistrate concerned, this petition is disposed of. (rajendra menon) judge mrs.mishra

Full Judgment

1 W.P.No.2267/2013 27.2.2013 Shri V.S.Shroti, learned Senior Counsel with Shri P.

Jain, for the petitioner.

Shri Sanjeev Kumar Singh, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents.

Petitioners claim that after death of their father they have filed complaint with regard to certain irregularities committed in operation of the Bank account and dispossession of movable and immovable property and inspite of the complaint, offence is not registered by the Police authorities and contending that under Section 154 of Cr.P.C.FIR should be registered and investigation done, this writ petition has been filed.

Taking note of the nature of dispute that is put forth in the writ petition it is seen that dispute is a family dispute with regard to the property of petitioneRs.father and the complaint is made against the family members with regard to the allegations made therein.

Taking note of the nature of the complaint and fact that petitioners has remedy of filing private complaint where the Magistrate can take cognizance of the matter and issue necessary directions to the police authorities, I am not inclined to interfere into the matter.

Accordingly, granting liberty to the petitioners to take recouRs.to the remedy available of filing private complaint before the Magistrate concerned, this petition is disposed of.

(RAJENDRA MENON) JUDGE Mrs.mishra

Same Court & Year Madhya Pradesh · 2013 Same Parties Neena V. Patel vs The State of Madhya Pradesh Same Subject Banking

Banking immovable property movable property Senior counsel Has been