CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA
Dharam Singh Gurjar – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER :
Chandra Kumar Songara, J.
Instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been preferred on behalf of accused-petitioner against the order dated 11.02.2015 passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Bandikui, District Dausa (hereinafter referred to as 'the Revisional Court'), in Criminal Revision Petition No.60/2011, whereby while allowing the revision petition filed by the complainant-respondent No.2, the case was remanded back to the trial Court to pass afresh order, and the order dated 19.10.2011 passed by the Court of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Sikrai, District Dausa (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial Court'), dismissing the application filed by complainant-respondent No.2 for taking cognizance & accepting the Final Report, was set aside.
2. Relevant facts, in brief, of the present case are that the complainant-respondent No.2, namely Harinarayan submitted a complaint on 28.07.2007 before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Sikrai, District Dausa, which was forwarded to Police Station, Manpur under Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C. for investigation. Thereupon, an F.I.R. No.265/2007 was registered at Police Station Manpur for
A Magistrate must provide clear reasons when disagreeing with a negative Final Report, and failing to do so renders the order unsustainable.
(1) In exercising revisional power, Sessions Court cannot quash cognizance and summoning order passed by Magistrate.(2) Plea of alibi of accused shall be examined only during trial at stage of defenc....
Magistrate was not bound by the final report submitted by the police after investigation. Once he has taken cognizance under Section 190(1)(a) Cr.P.C. he may have taken into consideration the evidenc....
Revision under Section 397(1) Cr.P.C. read with Section 401 Cr.P.C. not maintainable against the revisionary order of the Sessions Judge - No grounds for exercise of inherent power by this Court unde....
Taking cognizance requires cogent reasoning and credible evidence; reliance solely on uncorroborated testimony is insufficient.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that orders made under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. directing the police to register and investigate a case are not open to revision at the instance of ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.