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

1982 Supreme(AP) 308

PUNNAIAH
V. Chinna Reddy – Appellant
Versus
N. Vidyasagar Reddy – Respondent


PUNNAYYA, J.

( 1 ) SRI B. Subhashan Reddy, the learned counsel for the petitioners, contends that when the petitioner-accused were granted anticipatory bail, the learned Magistrate cannot take them into custody at the time of committing them for trial to the Sessions Court.

( 2 ) THE facts leading to this petition may be mentioned as follows : The first respondent gave report to the S. H. O. of Rural Police station, Nirmal, making certain allegations against the petitioners. The Sub-Inspector registered a case as Crime no. 50/1981 under sections 447, 324, and 326 IPC. , against the petitioners. The Sub-Inspector also issued FIR and took up investigation. The petitioners apprehending that they would be arrested filed Cr. MP Nos. 586/1981 and 623/1981, in the Court of Sessions Judge for anticipatory bail. The learned Sessions Judge granted anticipatory bail under S. 438 Cr. P. C. The Sub-Inspector after completing the investigation referred the case as one of civil nature. Aggrieved with the said orders of the police referring the case as one of civil nature, the first respondent filed a private complaint in the Judicial it Class Magistrates Court, Nirmal, under sections 147, 447, 324









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