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

1980 Supreme(J&K) 92

MUFTI BAHA-UD-DIN FAROOQI
Ab. Samad Nagu – Appellant
Versus
Ab. Rehman Khanday – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Advocate For Appellant: R.A. Jan
Advocate For Respondent: M. Amin

1. The trial magistrate has tried to weigh the evidence in golden scales. That is not the intendment of section 204 Cr. P. C- section 204 Cr. P. C. enables a magistrate to take cognizance of an offence and issue process if "there are sufficient grounds for proceedings" is limited. These words suggest that even where there is a suspicion that the accused has committed an offence that would be enough to entitled the magistrate to take cognizance and issue process against him. The allegation in the complaint was that the complainant had entrusted to the accused some, timber and fuel wood and which he Lad refused to return and had even be laboured the complainant when he demanded it back. The magistrate has entered into a detailed discussion of evidence and held that there is no cause under section 406 RPC, and that the dispute in that regard is purely of civil nature. He has further held that the complainant has already lodged a report with the police complaining of assault and as such he need not concern himself with this part of the case: On the principle set out above, the learned Magistrate ought, not to have gone so far as to appreciate and weigh the evidence in depth. On the oth

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