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

1979 Supreme(HP) 42

T.R.HANDA
DARSHAN KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
SUSHIL KUMAR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For petitioners:R. N. Malhotra and Mrs. Pritima Malhotra. For respondents: Kearishwar.

JUDGMENT

T. R. Handa, J.—The petitioner herein filed a criminal complaint under sections 143, 148, 149, 379, 380, 382, 452, 453, 454 and 461, I. P. C. against all the 63 respondents in the court of Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Chamba which complaint was later on with the enforcement of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 transferred to the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chamba. Respondents Nos. J, 3 and 4 are admittedly public servants not removable from office save by or with the permission of the State Government. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate after recording the preliminary evidence of the petitioner, vide his order dated 10-6-1976 summoned only 21 out of 63 respondents under sections 143, 379, 380 and 461 read with section 149, I. P. C. As regards respondents Nos. 1, 3 and 4 the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate observed that he could not take cognizance against these respondents without the sanction of the State Government as contemplated by section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as the act complained of against them was committed by them while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of their official duties. He accordingly refused to summon these three
















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