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

1999 Supreme(SC) 38

B.N.KIRPAL, S.RAJENDRA BABU
Rajiv Gupta – Appellant
Versus
State Of H. P. – Respondent


(1) SPECIAL leave granted.

(2) IN the instant case, the police had filed a challan against the appellants under Section 411 IPC. They were produced before the Court on 3-1-1994.

(3) ACCORDING to the appellants as the trial had not commenced for more than three years, they filed an application before the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class where relying upon the decision of this Court in the case of Common Cause v. Union of India it was contended that because more than three years have elapsed and the trial had not commenced, therefore, the appellants should be discharged. Relying upon this decision, the Judicial Magistrate vide order dated 15-1-1997 held that the pendency of the case was for more than three years and it did not fall under any of the exceptions contained in the judgment of this Court and, therefore, the appellants were entitled to be discharged. Order to this effect was accordingly passed.

(4) THE High Court in revision referred to clarification given by this Court in the case of Common Cause v. Union of India and then held that as no charge had been framed by the Magistrate, therefore, the trial will not be deemed to have commenced and the a






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