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

2001 Supreme(Gau) 64

H.K.SEMA
Rajendra Kumar Sood – Appellant
Versus
Jagat Singh Dugar – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
S.P.Roy , A.B.Choudhary

By this petition under section 482 read with section 401 of the Criminal & Procedure Code with Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the revisionist prayed for quashing of Complaint Case No. 812c/88 pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Karnrup, Guwahati on the ground inter alia that the learned trying Magistrate has taken cognizance after the mandatory period imposed by section 468 of the Cr PC inasmuch as punishment prescribed under section 403 of the IPC is punishable with imprisonment for two years.

2.1 have heard Mr. SP Roy, learned counsel for the revisionists as well as Mr. AB Choudhury, learned counsel for the respondent.

3. The Complaint Case No. 812/88 has been registered before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup, Guwahati preceded by a complaint petition dated 13.6.88 filed by the complainant/respondent. The complaint petition has been registered under section 403 of the IPC. On receipt of the complaint, the learned trying Magistrate passed the following orders: "13.6.99 : Complaint received on transfer.

Complainant is present and examined. It reveals that the complainant lodged an ejahar with the PS in relation to the same occurrence. Hence subject to the p

























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