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

2009 Supreme(SC) 1050

ARIJIT PASAYAT, ASOK KUMAR GANGULY
K. T. Joseph – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent


JUDGMENT

DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.

1. Leave granted. A small issue relating to the transfer of the proceedings in CC 1290 of 2008 on the file of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam forms the foundation for these proceedings. By an order in Criminal Revision Petition no.1858 of 2008 a learned Single Judge directed transfer of the case to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam. Certain observations were made against the Judicial Officer and his conduct.

2. Learned Single Judge has observed that after the amendment to Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short the `Code') with effect from 23.6.2006 by Central Act 25/2005 it is mandatory on the part of the learned Magistrate to conduct an enquiry under Section 202 of Code. Learned Single Judge noted that the Magistrate had emphasized that he was considering the complaint at the pre cognizance stage which according to him was not correct. By deciding to examine the complainant and the witnesses under Section 202 of Code, the Magistrate had already taken cognizance of the offence and he was not considering the sworn statements of the witnesses at the pre cognizance stage. Learned Single Judge felt that



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