KRISHNASWAMY REDDY
K. Shanmugasundara Nadar – Appellant
Versus
V. Sadasivam – Respondent
ORDER. - This petition has been filed to quash the charge framed in C.C. No. 4690 of 1966 by the Fourth Presidency Magistrate, G.T., Madras.
2. The complainant-respondent filed a private complaint against the petitioner before the Fourth Presidency Magistrate which was taken on file under S. 417, I.P.C., triable under Summons procedure. Subsequently after issuing process to the petitioner, the learned Presidency Magistrate framed a charge under S. 420, LP.C. which is triable under warrant procedure.
3. The point that arises for consideration in this case is whether a Magistrate who took cognizance of the case under S. 190(1)(a) of an offence triable as a summons case can subsequently convert it into a warrant case. The learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. G. Gopalaswami contends that once the Magistrate has taken cognizance of an offence triable as a summons case, he cannot convert it under any circumstances to a warrant case, even if it is disclosed from the records and the evidence that an offence triable as a warrant case is made out. I do not think there is any substance in his contention. There is no bar in the Criminal Procedure Code to adopt the procedure as was don
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.