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

2012 Supreme(Raj) 616

MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA
Harsahay Meena – Appellant
Versus
State of Raj. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared
Sanjay Singhal, for Petitioners;
Peeyush Kumar, PP, for State

Hon'ble SHARMA, J.—This criminal misc. petition has been filed under section 482 Cr.P.C. by the petitioners against the order dated 30.4.2012 of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate Shahbad, District Baran in criminal case No. 151/2012 registered upon a protest petition filed by the non-petitioner No.2, by which the Magistrate took cognizance agaisnt the petitioners for the offence under sections 454, 380 and 427 IPC and issued non-bailable warant.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that for a petty matter the Magistrate has issued non-bailable warrant in a matter in which the police has submitted a negative report. After receiving negative report the Judicial Magistrate recorded the statements of the complainant and witnesses under section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. took cognizance agaisnt the petitioners and further the petitioners have been summoned through non-bailable warrant. This order of the Judicial Magistrate deserves to be quashed and set aside. The learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in Inder Mohan Goswami vs. State of Uttaranchal, (2007) 12 SCC 1. He wants that the cognizance order should not be quashed but at lea



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