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

2015 Supreme(All) 3101

PANKAJ NAQVI
Meraj Alam – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Adil Jamal.
For the Respondents: G.A.

JUDGMENT

Pankaj Naqvi, J.

Heard Sri Adil Jamal, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.

2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C is preferred against the order dated 10.9.2015 in Misc. Application No.67/2015, under Section 126(2) Cr.P.C, whereby the applicant has been directed to deposit 50 % of the awarded amount as a condition precedent for the maintainability of the recall application.

3. It is submitted that under the Code, no such condition with regard to deposit of amount could be imposed.

4. A perusal of the proviso appended to Section 126(2) Cr.P.C, provides that on a good cause being shown in an application for recall, an ex parte order may be set aside on such terms including the terms as to the payment of cost, to the opposite party as the Magistrate may think just and proper.

5. Thus, in a given case, it is always open for the learned Magistrate to impose such terms, which would include a condition of deposit of certain amount of maintenance as a condition precedent for recall. The payment of cost is over and above to the terms, if any. The submission raised is misconceived and is rejected. Moreover, deposit of 50 % of the awarded amount as a condition pr



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