Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
AJAY KUMAR GUPTA
Garima Shaw @ Guddi Shaw – Appellant
Versus
Umesh Kumar Shaw – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.
1. By filing this Criminal Revisional application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the Petitioner has challenged the correctness, legality and propriety of an Order dated 03.11.2021 passed by the Learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate – II, Calcutta in the Complaint Case No. CNS No. 1058 of 2021.
2. By the said impugned order dated 03.11.2021, the Learned Magistrate took cognizance against the petitioner under Sections 193/199/209 of the IPC in a proceeding filed under Section 340 read with Section 195 of the CrPC.
3. The brief facts, leading to filing of this Criminal Revisional application, are as under: -
3a. The petitioner is a legally married wife of the opposite party no. 1. She had filed an application under Section 12 read with Section 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 being Misc. Case No. 17/2017. The said proceeding was dismissed for default by the Learned 18th Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta. At the relevant point of time, the petitioner/wife had been residing in joint mess. After dismissal of the said case, the petitioner was ousted from her matrimonial house.
3b. Due to change
Cognizance for contempt must be taken by the court where original proceedings are pending; failure to do so violates the mandatory requirements of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Cognizance of offences under specific sections of IPC must adhere to procedural requirements outlined in CrPC; failure to follow these renders such actions invalid.
The Magistrate can take cognizance of a case independently of the conclusion arrived at by the investigating officer, based on the facts emerging from the investigation, as per the provisions of Sect....
An order summoning an accused in a criminal case is not an interlocutory order and revision is maintainable. The Magistrate must apply his mind to the facts of the case and law governing the issue an....
The court clarified that a Magistrate's order for police investigation under Section 156(3) does not constitute taking cognizance of an offence, allowing for subsequent proceedings under the appropri....
The trial court's conviction under Section 188 IPC was invalid due to non-compliance with mandatory procedural requirements of Section 195 Cr.P.C., leading to a miscarriage of justice.
The power of quashing a criminal proceeding should be exercised sparingly and with circumspection, only in the rarest of rare cases.
Cognizance of certain offences under the Indian Penal Code can only be taken on a complaint in writing by the public servant concerned or by the Court or officer authorized by the Court, as per the p....
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
