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

1958 Supreme(All) 141

V.D.BHARGAVA
RAM PRASAD SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Bansilal Jaiswal, Ranjit Singh

V. D. BHARGAVA, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal against an order passed under Section 476, Cr. P. C. , for a complaint to be filed against the appellant under Section 193,. P. C.

( 2 ) A preliminary objection has been taken on behalf of the State that no appeal lies because at the present moment the order is only that a complaint be filed under Section 193,. P. C. and actually no complaint has been filed, the appeal being provided under Section 476-B as against the filing of the complaint and not against an order directing a complaint to be filed. I am unable to agree with this contention. After the order of the court for lodging a complaint under Section 193, it is only a ministerial action which has to be performed by the office and no further order is necessary from the court. An appeal always lies from an order of the court and not from its actual execution by the office. If after the order no further order was necessary by the court then in that case how can it be said that an appeal would lie from that action. Learned Counsel has placed reliance on the case of jagan Prasad v. State, 1957 All LJ 17 decided by a learned single Judge of this Court. But with great respect I do not agr







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