Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA
Sikander Singh – Appellant
Versus
Directorate of Enforcement, Gurugram – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of proceedings against the petitioner (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. contentions of petitioner and respondent (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. issues for consideration raised by the court (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. application of section 223 of the bnss and judicial interpretation (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. court's directive for fresh hearing (Para 9 , 10) |
JUDGMENT :
TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J.
The petition has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘ BNSS ’), for setting aside order dated 22.11.2024, Annexure P-6, whereby Special Judge [under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (for short, ‘PMLA’)]-cum- Sessions Judge, Gurugram, dismissed the petitioner's application filed under Section 223 read with Section 511 of the seeking an opportunity of hearing before taking cognizance of offences alleged in prosecution complaint, dated 27.06.2024, filed against him. Prayer has also been made to set aside order dated 05.12.2024, Annexure P-8, whereby the Special Judge proceeded to take cognizance of the offences against the petitioner and summoned him along with other accused to face trial for commission of offences under Section 3 read with Section 70 punishable unde
The court established that a right to hearing under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita applies, requiring courts to afford such hearing before taking cognizance of offences against the accused.
The provision requiring an accused to be heard before cognisance is a mandatory, substantive right. Cognisance orders passed without such a hearing are void ab initio, and ministerial registration of....
The requirement to provide an accused an opportunity to be heard before taking cognizance of an offence is a mandatory, substantive right. This procedural mandate applies to all cognizance orders pas....
The denial of an opportunity for a hearing before taking cognizance vitiates the cognizance order and subsequent proceedings under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, constituting a violation of ....
A magistrate must adhere to procedural safeguards, including providing the accused a hearing before taking cognizance, as mandated by Section 223 of BNSS; failure to comply renders the cognizance ord....
The court established that a magistrate must provide an opportunity for the accused to be heard before taking cognizance of criminal complaints, ensuring adherence to procedural justice under Section....
The court emphasized that under Section 223(1) of BNSS, a Magistrate must examine the complainant and provide the accused an opportunity to be heard before taking cognizance of an offence.
The court upheld that cognizance is taken of the offence rather than the offender, enabling supplementary complaints without violating prior hearing mandates, confirming no sanction under Section 197....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
