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

1982 Supreme(Kar) 163

M.NAGAPPA
THIRTHARAJ UPENDRA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent


Advocates:
G.S.BHATT, K.H.N.KHURANGA, K.R.D.KARANTH

M. NAGAPPA, J.

( 1 ) THIS petition by the accused is directed against the order dated 26-5-1981 passed by the Judicial Magistrate I Class (II Court), Hubli in C. C. No. 869 of 1981 directing to frame a charge against him for an offence punishable under Ss. 379 i. P. C.

( 2 ) ON the basis of a complaint a charge sheet was placed by the Sub-Inspector of police (Crime) Sub-Urban Police Station hubh, against the accused for offences under Ss. 379 and 411 I. P. C. The accused was furnished with copies of the documents of prosecution as required under law. The prosecution as also the learned counsel for the accused were heard before framing of the charge. Thereafter the learned Magistrate passed the impugned order, rejecting the prayer of the accused that he may be discharged as the matter involved in the case is one of civil nature, and directed a charge to be framed against the accused for an offence punishable under S. 379 I. P. C. It is the legality and correctness of the said order that is being assailed in this petition.

( 3 ) SRI G. S. Bhat, learned counsel appe" aring for the petitioner-accused, contended that the impugned order cannot be sustained in law inasmuch as the magistrat






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