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

1959 Supreme(AP) 203

BHIMASANKARAM
Public Prosecutor – Appellant
Versus
C. D. Naidu – Respondent


BHIMASANKARAM, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal by the State against an order of acquittal. Each of the 17 respondents was charged under two counts -- one under Section 143 I. P. C. and another under Section 341 J. P. C. The learned District Munsiff-cum-First Class Magistrate rejected the evidence of all the prosecution witnesses except two which he did not take into consideration because he thought it was not "relevant and admissible". It is best to state his reasons in his own words. "first I propose to consider whether the evidence of the Deputy Superintendent of Police and Sub-Inspector of Police cart be acted upon by the Court in deciding the case of the accused. This case is filed by the prosecution under the amended Criminal Procedure Code, and it is on a police report under Section 173 Cr. P. C. In such cases it is obligatory 011 the part of the prosecution to decide before commencement of the enquiry what witnesses it proposes to examine in support of its case and mention their names in the charge sheet that is filed under Section 173 Cr. P. C. and furnish to. the accused copies of the statements of those witnesses recorded under Section 162 Cr. P. C. vide Section 173 (4) Cr. P.





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