Back
TIRTHANKAR GHOSH
Rishikesh Meena – Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Tirthankar Ghosh, J.
1. The two revisional applications being CRR 804 of 2024 and CRR 1112 of 2024 are disposed of by a common order as in CRR 804 of 2024 the subject matter of challenge relates to the order dated 1.02.2024 passed in Sessions Case no. 78/23 wherein the learned Chief Judge, City Sessions Court, Calcutta was pleased to dismiss the application for discharge prayed on behalf of the present petitioner by way of an application dated 19.12.2023; while in CRR 1112 of 2024 the subject matter of challenge is an order dated 19.02.2024 wherein the learned Chief Judge, City Sessions Court in Sessions Case No. 78/23 was pleased to frame charges against the petitioner under Section 498A/307/494/336 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
2. Mr. P. Bhattacharyya, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner challenged both the orders passed by the learned Chief Judge, City Sessions Court on the grounds that the learned Chief Judge, City Sessions Court failed to appreciate the earlier order passed by the Hon’ble High Court, Calcutta as also did not adhere to the relevant provisions of Chapter XVIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure relati
The Court emphasized the importance of correctly interpreting and applying the provisions of CrPC Chapter XVIII, particularly in relation to the consideration of evidence and framing of charges in se....
The court upheld the framing of an additional charge under Section 376, affirming that a de novo trial is required after a case is committed to the Sessions Court.
The discretionary nature of Section 228(1)(a) Cr.P.C and the absence of a mandatory requirement for the Sessions Court to frame charges before transferring the case to the Chief Judicial Magistrate.
A Magistrate must discuss evidence recorded before him to form an opinion that the accused merits punishment more severe than seven years and record reasons before committing the case to the Court of....
Pont of law : Procedure provided under Section 33 (1) with regard to the power of the Special Court to take cognizance, without any committal of the accused, to the extent of any inconsistency, would....
The main legal point established is the requirement for the court to consider the materials before framing charges, especially in cases involving serious allegations.
Revision under Section 397(1) Cr.P.C. read with Section 401 Cr.P.C. not maintainable against the revisionary order of the Sessions Judge - No grounds for exercise of inherent power by this Court unde....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
