GHANSHYAM Vs. STATE OF M P
LAWS(SC)-2006-9-116
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: MADHYA PRADESH)
Decided on September 29,2006

GHANSHYAM Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Respondents


Cited Judgements :-

BALAK RAM VS. STATE OF H P [LAWS(HPH)-2008-11-9] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF TRIPURA VS. BIKASH SINHA [LAWS(GAU)-2007-10-23] [REFERRED TO]
SANJEEV KUMAR JAISWAL VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2009-5-747] [REFERRED TO]
HEMAVATHI VS. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD [LAWS(APH)-2008-9-149] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF CHHATTISHGARH VS. GOVINDLAL VORA [LAWS(CHH)-2008-5-1] [REFERRED TO]
M. SATYANARAYANA RAJU VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(APH)-2009-4-106] [REFERRED TO]
MAJOR SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2009-11-104] [REFERRED TO]
NATURAL AGRO PRODUCTS LTD VS. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION [LAWS(CAL)-2015-6-6] [REFERRED TO]
SHAKRAJEET NAYAK AND ORS. VS. STATE OF C.G. AND ORS. [LAWS(CHH)-2015-7-23] [REFERRED TO]
MAHENDRA AND ORS. VS. STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. [LAWS(ALL)-2015-9-227] [REFERRED TO]
RAMESH KUMAR SHARMA VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2016-2-34] [REFERRED TO]
IN RE: WITHDRAWAL OF CRIMINAL CASES BY STATE GOVERNMENT (ARISING OUT OF CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION NO. 10816 OF 2015 RAM NARAYAN YADAV V. STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS) VS. STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2017-2-35] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH VS. SINGHI RAM [LAWS(HPH)-2017-6-8] [REFERRED TO]
SUSHANT SHUKLA VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND OTHERS [LAWS(CHH)-2014-11-73] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Dalveer Bhandari, J. - (1.)Leave granted.
(2.)This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 08.8.2005 passed in Writ Petition No. 1356 of 2004 by the M.P. High Court of Judicature at Jabalpur, Bench at Gwalior, M.P.
(3.)Brief facts which are necessary to dispose of the appeal are recapitulated as under:
A writ petition was filed by respondent No. 3 Surya Prasad son of Hariram, aged about 82 years, in which he had complained about the inaction on the part of the police authorities of the police station, Morar in not registering his complaint and taking action against the persons who had caused injuries to him and his sons. It was stated in the writ petition that on 8.11.1986, respondent No. 3 and his sons were attacked. They sustained injuries and thereafter respondent No. 3 was medically examined. In spite of filing the complaint, the police authorities of the Morar police station neither registered any case nor took any action against the accused but in fact the police people protected the accused persons. In the writ petition, he had prayed that justice be done to him and the accused be punished.



Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.