SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2000 Supreme(SC) 198

R.P.SETHI, G.B.PATTANAIK
Kishori Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


ORDER

Leave granted.

2. These three Appellants though were named as accused in the FIR, but had not been chargesheeted when the police, after investigation filed the chargesheet under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The offence in question is one which was triable by a Court of Sessions. The Magistrate by an order dated 10.6.1997 came to the conclusion that there appears sufficient grounds to proceed against the accused persons and as such cognizance be taken under Sections 302/34, 324 and 448 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. The expression "accused persons" would obviously mean those accused persons against whom the police had filed the chargesheet. Later, on the prayer of the prosecution, the Magistrate passed an order on 22.10.1997 issuing non-bailable warrants of arrest against these (the present Appellants), who had not been chargesheeted by the police while filing the papers under Section 173 of Cr.P.C. though named as accused in the FIR. These Appellants then moved the learned Sessions Judge in Revision who came to the conclusion that the order of the Magistrate is without jurisdiction and allowed the Revision.

4. The matter having been carried in appeal, th











Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top