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

2008 Supreme(SC) 1053

ALTAMAS KABIR, MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
Bharat Parikh – Appellant
Versus
C. B. I. – Respondent


JUDGMENT

ALTAMAS KABIR, J. - Leave granted.

2. Two legal propositions fall for consideration in this appeal. The first proposition deals with the question as to whether having framed charges against an accused, a Magistrate has the jurisdiction in law to recall such order on the ground that the prosecution had failed to comply with the provisions of Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. An ancillary question will also arise as to whether such failure would render the framing of charge void.

3. The second proposition raises a question as to whether in exercise of its inherent powers, the High Court could quash the charges framed and acquit the accused on account of such non- compliance with the provisions of Sections 207 and 238 of the aforesaid Code.

4. The appellant herein is the original accused No.5 in a special case pending before the learned Special Judge, Mumbai in which charge was framed against him and the other accused persons on 13th December, 1996 under Sections 120-B read with Sections 420, 468, 471, 477-A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d)of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

5. Though such charge had been framed against















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