Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 2013 (3) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (3) TMI 616 - SC - Indian LawsWhether the High Court failed to appreciate that the appellant had not granted long adjournments to the accused-complainant as the appellant wanted to conclude the trial at the earliest? Whether the Enquiry Officer, the High Court on administrative side as well as on judicial side, committed a grave error in placing reliance on the statement of the complainant as well as of Shri C.B. Gajjar, Advocate, recorded in a preliminary enquiry? Whether High Court erred in shifting the onus of proving various negative circumstances upon the appellant who was delinquent in the enquiry? Whether the onus lies on the department to prove the charge and it failed to examine any of the employee of the court, i.e., Stenographer, Bench Secretary or Peon attached to the office of the appellant for proving the entry of Shri Gajjar, Advocate in her chamber on 17.8.1993? Whether the complainant has been disbelieved by the Enquiry Officer as well as the High Court on various issues, particularly on the point of his personal hearing, the conversation between the appellant and Shri C.B. Gajjar, Advocate on 17.8.1993, when they met in the chamber? Whether the allegation of the complainant, that appellant had threatened him through his wife, forcing him to withdraw the complaint against her, has been disbelieved? Whether the complainant as well as Shri C.B. Gajjar, Advocate had been talking about the appellant’s husband having collecting the amount on behalf of the appellant, for deciding the cases, though at that point of time, she was unmarried? Whether there is nothing on record to show that the appellant whose defence has been disbelieved in toto, had ever been given any adverse entry in her ACRs, or punished earlier in any enquiry. While she has been punished solely on uncorroborated statement of an accused facing trial for misappropriation?
|