Skip to content


Sarita Pawar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation

Court

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Decided On

Appellant

Sarita Pawar

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt:


.....dangi. kushal singh dangi who is present in court has also stated that the vakalatnama does not bear his signature. in view of aforesaid, we find that in this case, a fraud has been played with the court by filing the petition by impersonating some other person and for filing this petition by impersonation, praveen dhars.is responsible. considering facts of the case, praveen dhars.is directed to produce sarita pawar and abhay narayan before this court on 9.4.2013. however, to complete the enquiry in this regard, we direct to praveen dhars.to produce a surety for his presence before this court during 2 w.p.no.4175/2013 sarita pawar & others state of m.p.& others 8.4.2013 cours.of the day and if he furnishes bail and personal bond of rs.5,000/- to the satisfaction of the registry, he be released on bail, otherwise he be sent to jail for his appearance before this court on the next date of hearing. be listed for hearing on 9.4.2013. (krishn kumar lahoti) (b.d.rathi) judge judge c.

Judgment:


1 W.P.No.4175/2013 Sarita Pawar & others State of M.P.& others 8.4.2013 Shri Nitin Jain, Counsel for petitioneRs.In compliance of earlier order, petitioner No.8 Kushal Singh is present in Court.

It is submitted by Shri Nitin Jain, Advocate that he did not knot petitioner Kushal Singh.

However, this petition has been filed by him at the instance of Praveen Dharse, who is present in Court.

It is stated by Praveen DhaRs.that he was earlier serving in the college of respondent No.4 in the yeaRs.2009, 2010 and 2011 and petitioner Kushal Singh was student of respondent No.4 college in the aforesaid yeaRs.It is submitted by him that he had received telephonic calls of Sarita Pawar and Abhay Narayan and the Vakalatnama which is filed in this case was brought to him by the aforesaid persons.

Thereafter, he contacted the counsel and the petition was filed by the counsel.

It is submitted by him that this Vakalatnama was not executed in his presence.

From the perusal of the record, we find that in the name of Kushal Singh, two petitions have been filed before this Court bearing W.P.No.3943/2013 and another W.P.No.4175/2013 and from the perusal of the record of W.P.No.3943/2013, we prima facie find that present petition i.e.W.P.No.4175/2013 was not filed by Kushal Singh Dangi.

Kushal Singh Dangi who is present in Court has also stated that the Vakalatnama does not bear his signature.

In view of aforesaid, we find that in this case, a fraud has been played with the Court by filing the petition by impersonating some other person and for filing this petition by impersonation, Praveen DhaRs.is responsible.

Considering facts of the case, Praveen DhaRs.is directed to produce Sarita Pawar and Abhay Narayan before this Court on 9.4.2013.

However, to complete the enquiry in this regard, we direct to Praveen DhaRs.to produce a surety for his presence before this Court during 2 W.P.No.4175/2013 Sarita Pawar & others State of M.P.& others 8.4.2013 couRs.of the day and if he furnishes bail and personal bond of Rs.5,000/- to the satisfaction of the Registry, he be released on bail, otherwise he be sent to jail for his appearance before this Court on the next date of hearing.

Be listed for hearing on 9.4.2013.

(Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (B.D.Rathi) Judge Judge C.


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