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

2017 Supreme(Bom) 2307

T.V.NALAWADE
Yasmin Akeel Pinjari – Appellant
Versus
Mohd. Khabulal Pinjari – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. H.D. Deshmukh.

JUDGMENT :

T.V. NALAWADE, J.

1. The proceeding is filed to challenge the order of issue process made in private complaint bearing R.C.C. No. 180/2006 by the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Kallamb, District Osmanabad. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and the learned APP. The counsel for original complainant Shri Magare did not turn up.

2. Only one point was argued by the learned counsel for petitioner. He submitted that the cognisance of the matter is taken by Kallamb Court from Osmanabad district without making any enquiry under section 202 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 as made necessary by amendment to section 202 which came in force from 24.6.2006.

3. This Court has gone through the copy of complaint. It shows that the matter is pending in Kallamb Court, but almost all the accused are residents of Ahmednagar district, section 202 of Cr.P.C. 1973 runs as under:-

"202. Postponement of issue of process:-

(1) Any Magistrate, on receipt of a complaint of an offence of which he is authorised to take cognisance or which has been made over to him under section 192, may, if he thinks fit, and shall in a case where the accused is residing at a place beyond the area in whic










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