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

2003 Supreme(Ker) 646

G.SASIDHARAN
Jomon Puthenpurackal – Appellant
Versus
Judicial 1st Class Magistrate - III – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. Petitioner is the complainant in C.M.P. 3157/2003 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-III, Thiruvananthapuram. He filed the above complaint in Court alleging that the accused in that complaint committed the offences under Ss.465 and 468 read with S.120B of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Magistrate commenced proceedings under S.202 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

2. The learned Magistrate issued summons to the second respondent in this petition, who is the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of Kerala, for production of documents. It is stated that the summons was not accepted by the Speaker and it was returned. Regarding the issuance of summons to the second respondent for production of documents he made statements to the press which, according to the petitioner, will amount to contempt of Court. The statement alleged to have been made by the second respondent reported in Malayala Manorama daily dated 16th September, 2003 is extracted in the petition. The report in the newspaper was that no Magistrate who knows things will not make such a demand and that anybody, who had read the Constitution of India, will not make such a demand to the Speak



























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