K.G.SHANKAR
Jagu Annavaram – Appellant
Versus
State Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A. P. , Hyderabad – Respondent
1. The petitioner filed a private complaint before the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Bhadrachalam alleging that two persons who are wife and husband committed various offences under Sections 468, 471, 474, 420, 427, 448 and 506 read with Section 34 IPC. The learned Magistrate referred the same to police on 03.04.2013 directing police to register an FIR under Sections 427, 448 and 506 r/w Sec.34 IPC. The learned Magistrate, consequently, omitted the offences under Sections 468, 471, 474 and 420 IPC in the reference. On the basis of reference under Section 156 (3) Cr. P.C., Bhadrachalam Town Police Station issued FIR in Crime No.122 of 2013 on 04.05.2013 under Sections 427, 448 and 506 r/w Sec.34 IPC. Questioning the order of the learned Magistrate for not referring the case for the offences under Sections 468, 471, 474 and 420 IPC, the present revision is laid.
2. The learned Magistrate would not appear to have passed any detailed order as to why he was directing police to register an FIR under Sections 427, 448 and 506 r/w Sec.34 IPC. Further, the learned Magistrate directed police to register an FIR under Sections 427, 448 and 506 r/w Sec.34 IPC. The purport of
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.