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

1979 Supreme(P&H) 154

J.M.TANDON
Kuldip Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent


Judgment

1. Kuldip Singh petitioner submitted an application under Section 301 (2), Cr. P. C. 1973, to Additional Sessions Judge, Sirsa, praying that in Sessions case No. 21-SC dated March 30, 1979, which relates to the murder of his brother, he may be allowed to take part in trial proceedings either personally or through his counsel. The learned Additional Sessions Judge declined the prayer vide order dated July 24, 1979. It is against this order that the present petition under Section 482, Cr. P. C. is directed.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that under sub-section (2) of Section 301, Cr. P. C. 1973, the petitioner has a right to engage a counsel to take part in the trial proceedings before the learned Additional Sessions Judge. The learned Additional Sessions Judge has wrongly declined permission on the ground that the petitioner is not related to the deceased and the widow of the deceased has already engaged another senior counsel to assist the Public Prosecutor.

3. Section 301, Cr. P. C., reads :-

"301. (1) The Public Prosecutor or Assistant Public Prosecutor in charge of a case may appear and plead without any written authority before any Court in which t



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