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

1974 Supreme(All) 167

HARI SWARUP
V. P. TYAGI – Appellant
Versus
RAM SINGH – Respondent


JUDGEMENT

1. This is an application under Section 561-A, Criminal Procedure Code for quashing the proceedings pending before the District Magistrate, Pithoragarh. A complaint had been filed by the respondent against the petitioner on 23-8-1969 alleging that the petitioner had committed offences under Sections 323 and 448. Indian Penal Code on August 20, 1969. The case is still pending and the trial has not concluded.

2. Learned Counsel has urged that the proceedings be quashed because cognizance taken by the Magistrate was not in accordance with law and the trial is proceeding in a court which has no jurisdiction. The other contention is that the protracted nature of the trial is itself sufficient for quashing the proceedings. In support of the first contention he has relied on Section, 35 of the Police Act and Regulation 488 of the Police Regulations. Section 35 of the Police Act reads as under :-

"Jurisdiction - Any charge against a police Officer above the rank of a constable under this Act shall be enquired into and determined only by an officer exercising the powers of a Magistrate."

Section 35, as it expressly states applies only to charges under the Police Act. The charge for wh









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