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

1979 Supreme(Pat) 253

K.B.N.SINGH, LALIT MOHAN SHARMA, UDAY SINHA
Sitaram Singh And Others, Etc. – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


Judgment

UDAY SINHA, J.

1. These three applications have been heard together and will be governed by this common judgement. When does "inquiry" in a proceeding under Sec.107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code) commence ? That is the point falling for consideration in these three applications. The commencement of Inquiry in a proceeding under Sec. 107 of the Code has assumed importance under the new Code, as Sec.116(6) has determined the life of a proceeding as six months from the commencement of the inquiry.

2. These three applications have been placed before the Special Bench in view of an apparent conflict of views in two Division Bench decisions of this Court, Considering the importance of the question involved H.L. Agrawal and P.S. Sahay, JJ. directed that the matter be considered and set at rest by a larger Bench. That is how these cases are before this Full Bench.

3. The facts in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 2724 of 1975 are that a proceeding under Sec.107 of the Code was initiated against the petitioner on 13-6-1974. They appeared in court in answer to notice on 24-7-1974 and prayed for time to show cause. Before the petitioners could show ca
































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