CourtKutchehry.com
Supreme CourtDivision Bench

Kaushal Kishor vs State of Uttar Pradesh

Supreme Court Of India · Decided on 27 September 2016 · Citation: (2017) 1 SCC 406 : (2017) 1 SCCCri 434

HON’BLE JUDGES
Mr. Dipak Misra and Mr. Uday Umesh Lalit, JJ.
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (Criminal) No.113 of 2016
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 195 words
1.

On a perusal of the Office Report dated 26.9.2016, it transpires that the service on respondent no.2 is complete. Despite service of notice, he has not entered appearance.

2.

Mr. Ravi Prakash Mehrotra, learned counsel appearing for the State of Uttar Pradesh, submits that he has instructions to appear on behalf of respondent nos.1, 3 and 4.

3.

Mr. Maninder Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General, who has entered appearance on behalf of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), submits that the investigation is in progress.

4.

In our considered view, respondent no.2 should have entered appearance as there are direct allegations against him in the writ petition.

5.

In view of the aforesaid, we direct the Central Bureau of Investigation to serve a copy of the writ petition on respondent no.2, forthwith.

6.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is granted permission to file additional documents before the next date of hearing.

7.

The Registry is directed to hand over copy of the notice to Mr. R. Balasubramanian, learned counsel, assisting Mr. Maninder Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the CBI, so as to enable him to effect the service on respondent no.2.