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

2000 Supreme(Ker) 12

K.T.THOMAS, D.P.MOHAPATRA
Kanti Bhadra Shah – Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. Leave granted.

2. Though the appellants succeeded in the High Court their grievance still persists as they are not out of woods now. Appellants approached the High Court to quash the charge framed against them by a Metropolitan Magistrate. The High Court quashed it, but directed the Magistrate to consider again whether the same charges could be framed against appellants afresh.

3. We heard learned counsel for the appellants, but we did not find it necessary to hear the sole respondent (State of West Bengal) as this appeal can be disposed of even without the aid of such arguments.

4. On the basis of a complaint lodged with the Police Station, Burra Bazar (Calcutta) an investigation was conducted by the police and the charge-sheet was filed before the Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta, against appellants and some other persons for offences under S.454, 380,120B of the Indian Penal Code. The Magistrate issued process to the accused and after hearing them a charge was framed against them for the said offences. While framing the charge the Magistrate had as per order dated 6.3.1999, dismissed the petition filed by the accused for discharging them. Appellants thereafter moved


















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