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

2007 Supreme(Mad) 4245

K.MOHAN RAM
Prof. D. Kannammal – Appellant
Versus
Renuga Palanisamy – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner:S. Kalyanaraman, Advocate. For the Respondent:

Judgment :-

The petitioner in the above Criminal Original Petition is the accused in S.T.C.No.1079 of 2007 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Salem and he is facing trial therein for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The above criminal original petition is filed seeking to quash all further proceedings in S.T.C.No.1079 of 2007 on the ground that the learned Magistrate has not followed the mandatory provisions contained in the Amended Section 202(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure viz., that the Court shall enquire into the case for the purpose of deciding if there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused who is residing outside the area over which the Court exercises jurisdiction had not been complied with.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner invited the attention of this Court to the Amended Section 202 (1) of the Cr.P.C. which reads as follows:

“202. Postponement of issue of process.--(1) Any Magistrate, on receipt of a complaint of an offence of which he is authorised to take cognizance or which has been made over to him under section 192, may, if he thinks fit (and shall, in a case where the accused is res













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