Back
A. BADHARUDEEN
BENNY S/O JOHNY – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
ORDER :
1. This Criminal Miscellaneous Case has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNSS’ for short), challenging Annexure A6, viz. order in CMP No. 3946/2017 dated 06.06.2017 on the files of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chalakkudy, in C.C. No. 2254/2013 arose out of Crime No. 245/2013 of Koratty Police Station, Thrissur, by the accused.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor in detail. Perused the relevant documents, including Annexure-A6 order.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that even though Section 323 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (‘Cr.P.C’ for short) permits a Magistrate to commit a case if it appears to the Magistrate at any stage of the proceedings before signing the judgment in any inquiry into an offence or a trial before the Magistrate, the order of committal should be self-speaking to justify the mandate of Section 323 of Cr.P.C. but the said procedure was not specifically followed in this matter. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, in the instant case, going by the order impugned, the learned Magistrate relied on the evidence of PW1 t
The main legal point established in the judgment is the exclusive jurisdiction of the Court in altering or adding charges and committing the case to the Court of Session, as well as the limitations o....
The court upheld the framing of an additional charge under Section 376, affirming that a de novo trial is required after a case is committed to the Sessions Court.
The discretionary nature of Section 228(1)(a) Cr.P.C and the absence of a mandatory requirement for the Sessions Court to frame charges before transferring the case to the Chief Judicial Magistrate.
Pont of law : Procedure provided under Section 33 (1) with regard to the power of the Special Court to take cognizance, without any committal of the accused, to the extent of any inconsistency, would....
The court affirmed that under Section 86(4) of the JJ Act, all relevant offences must be tried by the Children's Court, invalidating prior proceedings in the Magistrate's Court.
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
