Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Ravindra Jain vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 August, 2017

                          MCRC-12699-2017
               (RAVINDRA JAIN Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)


02-08-2017

      Shri Imtiaz Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner.
      Shri S.D.Khan, learned GA for the respondents/State.

Petitioner is a notary, who has allegedly notarized a false will. On the above report, crime has been registered at Police Station Chhipabad District-Harda for offence under Section 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 120-B against the accused persons including the petitioner.

Petitioner claimed protection under Section 13 of the Notaries Act, which provides that the complaint against the notary can only be filed by an officer authorized by the Central or State Government by general or specific order. A complaint by a police officer in this regard is illegal. Learned counsel placed reliance on V. Ranga Ramu Vs. State of Karnataka 1999 Cri.L.J. 561.

Considering the above circumstances, framing of charge against the petitioner (Ravindra Jain) is stayed till the next date.

Let the police diary be called.

Case be listed after one week.

(SUSHIL KUMAR PALO) JUDGE nd