ABDUL RAHIM vs SHAHID IQUBAL KHAN . — Crl.A. No. 933/2011
Case under Section II-A. Status: Disposed.
CNR: SCIN010256452007
Filing Date
05-Sep-2007
Registration No
Crl.A. No. 933/2011
Diary Number
25645/2007
Order Date
25-Feb-2015
Document Type
ROP - of Main Case
Disposal Type
Dismissed
Last updated 01-Jul-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.ABDUL RAHIM
Adv. HIMANSHU SHEKHAR
Respondent(s)
-
1.SHAHID IQUBAL KHAN .
Adv. AMBHOJ KUMAR SINHA GOPAL SINGH
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
25-Feb-2015
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
24-Feb-2015
Office Report - of Main CaseView PDF
-
29-Oct-2013
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
08-Apr-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
07-Mar-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
07-Feb-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
07-Feb-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
09-Nov-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
04-Oct-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
19-Aug-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
06-Jul-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
01-Apr-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
13-Aug-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
14-May-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
25-Nov-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
23-Apr-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
07-Mar-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
07-Jan-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
05-Sep-2007
Case filed
Registration No. Crl.A. No. 933/2011
Case Summary: Criminal Appeal No. 933/2011 The Supreme Court dismissed Abdul Rahim's appeal on 25 February 2015. Rahim challenged a High Court order that quashed cognizance taken by a trial magistrate in Complaint Case No. 247C of 2000 under IPC Sections 323, 504, and Representation of People Act Section 135A against Shahid Iqbal Khan (the Returning Officer). The Court found no material evidence supported Rahim's allegations—he claimed to be a BJP polling agent beaten by Khan, but provided no medical reports or supporting documentation. The Court upheld the High Court's finding that the complaint was frivolous, filed as a counter-complaint to obstruct an FIR registered by the Presiding Officer regarding booth disruptions by Rahim's brother, and constituted abuse of process. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts