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

2004 Supreme(Ker) 265

R.BASANT
K. Vasudevan – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent


Judgment :-

Is the proceedings under Section 200 Criminal Procedure Code “inquiry” an defined under Section 2(g) Criminal Procedure Code? Is the sworn statement recorded before the Magistrate under Section 200 Criminal Procedure Code, ‘evidence’? Can the affidavit filed under Section 145 of the N.I. Act be received by a court to proceed further without insisting on the personal appearance of the complainant? These questions of contextual relevance are thrown up for consideration in this revision petition.

2. The complainant, in a complaint under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, has preferred this revision petition against the order passed by the learned Magistrate “closing” the complaint. I extract below the impugned order:

“Complainant absent. It appears that complainant is not interested to proceed with this case. The Criminal. M.P. is closed”.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner first of all contends that a Criminal complaint cannot be disposed of with an order like the one extracted above. The Code of Criminal Procedure Speaks of termination of a complaint at the stage of 203 Criminal Procedure Code by dismissal. It does not permit closure of complaint, submits the counsel. I do



























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