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

2006 Supreme(Bom) 861

J.N.PATEL, B.P.DHARMADHIKARI
RAJESH s/o SURYABHAN NAYAK – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – Respondent


ORAL JUDGMENT

J. N. PATEL, J. : - These two writ petitions had been filed by the petitioners raising several key issues in reference to the practice and procedure followed by the Police Officers, who are vested with the powers of Executive Magistrate for conducting proceedings under Chapter VIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Code for short).

2. In Criminal Writ Petition No. 428/2002 the petitioner is an Advocate, who was required to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court, as one person by name Khobaib Raja engaged him to represent his case before the Special Executive Magistrate, Tahsil Division, city of Nagpur, in the proceedings initiated under section 107 of the Code at the behest of Police Station Lakadganj, and has highlighted the various illegalities and irregularities being practiced in the Court of Special Executive Magistrate, who also happens to be the Assistant Commissioner of Police of Kotwali Division, and has been joined in person as respondent No.3. The main grievance of the petitioner is that in addition to the procedure adopted by respondent No.3 and the officials working under him, respondent No. 3s behaviour is


































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