Unregistered Agreement Of Sale Entered Before Attachment Cannot Defeat Decree-Holder’s Claim: Andhra Pradesh High Court No Presumption That Joint Family Possesses Joint Property; Female Hindu Absolute Owner Of Property Purchased In Her Name: Allahabad High Court Age Determination Must Strictly Follow Hierarchy Of Documents Under JJ Act: Orissa High Court Acquits Man Of POCSO Charges Once 'C' Form Declarations Are Signed, Burden Shifts To Buyer To Prove Payment Of Outstanding Dues: Madras High Court Section 213 Succession Act No Bar To Eviction Suit If Claim Is Based On Landlord-Tenant Relationship, Not Title Under Will: Bombay High Court Meritorious Candidate Wrongfully Denied Appointment Entitled To Notional Seniority & Old Pension Scheme: J&K & Ladakh High Court 6-Year Delay In Propounding Will & Hostile Attesting Witness Constitute 'Grave Suspicious Circumstances': Delhi High Court Refuses Probate Section 319 CrPC Power Cannot Be Exercised Based On FIR Or Section 161 Statements: Allahabad High Court Quashes Summoning Of Unmarried Sisters Bail Proceedings Cannot Be Converted Into Recovery Proceedings; Court Can't Order Sale Of Accused's Property: Supreme Court Able-Bodied Husband Cannot Defeat Maintenance Claim By Projecting Income Below Minimum Wages: Delhi High Court Recording Section 313 CrPC Statement Before Cross-Examination Of Prosecution Witness Does Not Vitiate Trial: Karnataka High Court Murder By Unknown Assailants Is Not 'Accidental Death' Under Mukhymantri Kisan Bima Yojna: Allahabad High Court Section 311 CrPC | Court Not A Passive Bystander, Must Summon Material Witness If Essential For Just Decision: Rajasthan High Court GST Act Does Not Prima Facie Prohibit Consolidated Show-Cause Notices For Multiple Years: Bombay HC Refers Issue To Larger Bench 90% Burn Injuries No Bar To Making Statement; Dying Declaration Can Be Sole Basis For Conviction If Found Truthful: Madhya Pradesh High Court

Threats judge's wife by lawyer, formation of SIT to probe FIR: SC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Supreme Court ordered the Director General of Police in Uttar Pradesh to form a Special Investigation Team to investigate a FIR filed by the wife of an Additional District Judge alleging a threat by a Lawyer.

The bench of Justices Surya Kant and Abhay S. Oka ordered that the petitioner not be arrested for two weeks so that he may apply for pre-arrest bail before the proper forum.

In this instance, the wife of a Judicial Officer filed a First Information Report (FIR) against the petitioner (Amit Kumar Jain), alleging that he was threatening her. She sought appropriate protection for her family, citing multiple instances of threats.

The petitioner was consequently charged under Sections 452, 387, 353, 506, and 507 of the Indian Penal Code. Before the Allahabad High Court, he contested the FIR on the grounds that the Judicial Officer and his wife were complicit in the crime.

The Allahabad High Court denied Amit Kumar Jain's petition to transfer the case to another investigating agency, stating that the allegations were neither specific nor substantiated, and that there was no reason to question the impartiality of the Investigating Officer.

The Supreme Court ordered SSP to oversee the investigation into this matter.

The Petitioner had filed a Special Leave Petition with the Supreme Court challenging the Allahabad High Court's ruling.

Counsel for Ms. Preetika Dwivedi requested two weeks to file a counter-affidavit and an Action Taken Report.

To ensure that F.I.R. is investigated in a fair, impartial, and dispassionate manner, the Supreme Court ordered the Director General of Police of Uttar Pradesh to form a Special Investigation Team (SIT) led by a directly recruited IPS Officer and consisting of two additional Members with the ranks of Dy. SP and Inspector.

In light of the preceding, the Supreme Court scheduled the case for 22 August 2022.

D.D:01-08-2022

Amit Kumar Jain  Versus State Of U.P. & Ors.

Latest Legal News