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

1998 Supreme(Raj) 349

SHIV KUMAR SHARMA
Dhoori – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
S.S. Sunda, for Petitioners M.L. Goyal, for State

Honble SHARMA, J.–It is well settled that in a case triable by court of Session, a Magistrate cannot summon and commit a person, not named in the charge sheet, under section 319 Cr.P.C. to stand trial along side the accused. Admittedly, after usual investigation the Police Station Bissau submitted charge sheet against accused Suresh for committing offences under Sections 498A, 302 and 304 B IPC. The petitioners Dhoori, Ramavtar and Anchi were not named in the charge sheet. The ACJM Jhunjhunu vide order dated 6th Jan. 1996 took cognizance against the accused Suresh as well as against the petitioners Dhoori, Ramavtar and Anchi under sections 498A, 302, 304B and 34 IPC. The accused persons assailed the said order by preferring proceedings under section 482 Cr.P.C. before this court bearing S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 96/1996. This court disposed of the said petition vide order dated Feb. 2, 1996 stating that the question as to whether prima facie case against the accused persons is made out or not will be seen by the learned Sessions Judge at the time of hearing of arguments on charges. In the meanwhile the case was committed by the learned ACJM Jhunjhunu to the Court of Sessions











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