Monday, May 27, 2019

Criminal Procedure Code 1973, Section 362 and Section 242

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 362 and Section 242—Relevancy of Section 362—Rejection of application for bringing on record the authorisation for investigation issued to the DSP not having been ordered on merits but for failure to furnish a satisfactory explanation  for the delay, Section 362, held, has no relevance on facts.

Click here to download the full text of the judgment

Search By:

Act  |  Topic  |  Keyword



Criminal Procedure Code 1973,Sections 242, 173(2)(5)(a), 362 and 482

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Sections 242, 173(2)(5)(a), 362 and 482—Order of authorisation for investigation could not be filed along with the charge­sheet—Application was filed on behalf of the prosecution under Section 242 Cr.P.C. to bring on record the authorisation for investigation issued to the DSP—Application dismissed on the ground that no proper explanation had been furnished for not filing the same along with the charge-sheet—Subsequently, the authorisation was again sought to be brought on record by the prosecution invoking Section 173(2)(5)(a) of the Code—Said application under Section 482 also got dismissed applying the principles of res judicata even though there had been no adjudication on merits earlier.—Appeal against—Held, the truth and veracity of the authorisation order not being in issue, the failure to file it along with the charge­sheet was an omission constituting a procedural lapse only—The rejection of the first application not having been ordered on merits, but for failure to furnish a satisfactory explanation for the delay, Section 362 Cr.P.C has no relevance on facts.—There was no impediment in the appellant seeking to bring the same on record subsequently under Section 173(2)(5)(a) of the Code—The failure to bring the authorisation on record, was more a matter of procedure, which is but a handmaid of justice—Substantive justice must always prevail over procedural or technical justice—To hold that failure to explain delay in a procedural matter would operate as res judicata will be a travesty of justice considering that the present is a matter relating to corruption in public life by holder of a public post—The rights of an accused are undoubtedly important, but so is the rule of law and societal interest in ensuring that an alleged offender be subjected to the laws of the land in the larger public interest—To put the rights of an accused at a higher pedestal and to make the rule of law and societal interest in prevention of crime, subservient to the same cannot be considered as dispensation of justice—A balance therefore has to be struck—A procedural lapse cannot be placed at par with what is or may be substantive violation of the law—Appeal Allowed—Prosecution is permitted to bring the order of authorisation for investigation on record.     

Click here to download the full text of the judgment

Search By:

Act  |  Topic  |  Keyword



Resjudicata

Resjudicata—To hold that failure to explain delay in a procedural matter would operate as res judicata will be a travesty of justice.

Click here to download the full text of the judgment

Search By:

Act  |  Topic  |  Keyword



Saturday, May 25, 2019

Criminal Procedure Code 1973, Section 319

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 319—Power of Court to summon under Section 319 on the basis of statement of witness—The Court, held, can exercise the power under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. even on the basis of the statement made in the examination­in­chief of the witness concerned and the Court need not wait till the cross­ examination of such a witness and the Court need not wait for the evidence against the accused proposed to be summoned to be tested by cross­examination.

Click here to download the full text of the judgment

Search By:

Act  |  Topic  |  Keyword



Criminal Procedure Code 1973, Section 319

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 319—Power of Court to summon under Section 319—A person not named in the FIR or a person though named in the FIR but has not been charge­sheeted or a person who has been discharged can be summoned under Section 319 of the CrPC, provided from the evidence (may be on the basis of the evidence collected in the form of statement made in the examination­in­chief of the witness concerned), it appears that such person can be tried along with the accused already facing trial.

Click here to download the full text of the judgment

Search By:

Act  |  Topic  |  Keyword



Criminal Procedure Code 1973, Section 319

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 319—Whether Court has power to summon under Section 319 where opportunity to the complainant to file a protest petition has gone—Held, yes—Even in  a  case  where  the  stage  of  giving opportunity to the complainant to file a protest petition urging upon the trial Court to summon other persons as well who were named in the FIR but not implicated in the charge­sheet has gone, in that case also, the Court is still not powerless by virtue of Section 319 of the CrPC and even those persons named in the FIR but not implicated in the charge­sheet can be summoned to face the trial provided during the trial some evidence surfaces against the proposed accused.

Click here to download the full text of the judgment

Search By:

Act  |  Topic  |  Keyword



Criminal Procedure Code 1973, Section 319


Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 319—Power of Court to summon under Section 319—Order of the learned Magistrate summoning the appellants to face the trial in exercise of powers under Section 319 of the CrPC—Confirmed in revision by the High Court—Appeal against—In the present case, the appellants were also named in the FIR—However, they were not shown as accused in the challan/charge­sheet—Nothing is on record whether at any point of time the complainant was given an opportunity to submit the protest application against non­filing of the charge­sheet against the appellants—In the deposition before the Court, P.W.1 and P.W.2 have specifically stated against the appellants and the specific role is attributed to the accused­appellants—Held, the statement of P.W.1 and P.W.2 before the Court can be said to be “evidence” during the trial and, therefore, on the basis of the same and as held by this Court in the case of Hardeep Singh vs. State of Punjab (2014) 3 SCC 92, the persons against whom no charge­sheet is filed can be summoned to face the trial—Therefore, no error has been committed by the Courts below to summon the appellants herein to face the trial in exercise of power under Section 319 of the CrPC—Appeal dismissed.
             
Click here to download the full text of the judgment

Search By:

Act  |  Topic  |  Keyword



Wednesday, April 17, 2019

Criminal Procedure Code 1973, Section 173(8) and Section 227

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 173(8) and Section 227—The Magistrate cannot suo moto direct for further investigation under Section 173(8) of the Cr.PC or direct the reinvestigation into a case at the post cognizance stage, more particularly when, in exercise of powers under Section 227 of the Cr.PC, the Magistrate discharges the accused. 

Pay Rs.300/- and get full text of the judgment on the above stated point. Judgment will be sent to you by email only after receipt of full payment in our bank account.*


File Name:- APRIL 2019_SC_5.pdf


*Terms and Conditions applicable

Criminal Procedure Code 1973, Section 173(8) and Section 227

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 173(8) and Section 227—Power of Magistrate to order further investigation when the accused has been discharged by him—Held, once the order of discharge is passed, thereafter the Magistrate has no jurisdiction to suo moto direct the investigating officer for further investigation and submit the report. In such a situation, only two remedies are available: (i) a revision application can be filed against the discharge or (ii) the Court has to wait till the stage of Section 319 of the Cr.PC—However, at the same time, considering the provisions of Section 173(8) of the Cr.PC, it is always open for the investigating agency to file an application for further investigation and thereafter to submit the fresh report and the Court may, on the application submitted by the investigating agency, permit further investigation and permit the investigating officer to file a fresh report and the same may be considered by the learned Magistrate thereafter in accordance with law. 

Pay Rs.300/- and get full text of the judgment on the above stated point. Judgment will be sent to you by email only after receipt of full payment in our bank account.*


File Name:- APRIL 2019_SC_5.pdf


*Terms and Conditions applicable

Criminal Procedure Code 1973, Section 173 (8) r/w Sections 173(2) and Section 227

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 173 (8) r/w Sections 173(2) and Section 227—Whether IO can apply for further investigation even if the accused has been discharged by the Magistrate?—Held, yes—It is always open for the investigating officer to apply for further investigation, even after forwarding the report under subsection (2) of Section 173 and even after the discharge of the accused. 

Pay Rs.300/- and get full text of the judgment on the above stated point. Judgment will be sent to you by email only after receipt of full payment in our bank account.*


File Name:- APRIL 2019_SC_5.pdf


*Terms and Conditions applicable