Back
RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN
Israr Ahmad – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri Ajmal Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Aniruddha Kumar Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate-I for the State.
2. By means of this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner has prayed to quash the proceeding of Criminal Case No. 2355 of 2020, State Vs. Israr Ahmad and Others, arising out of Case Crime No. 839 of 2019, under Sections 143, 188, 342 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Pratapgarh, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pratapgarh as well as chargesheet dated 24.11.2019 and summoning order dated 12.02.2020.
3. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Investigating Officer has conducted the investigation in sheer casual and cursory manner and filed the chargesheet against the petitioner under Sections 143, 188, 342 IPC. The court concerned took cognizance in a mechanical manner and has issued the summoning order without applying its judicial mind against the petitioner on 12.02.2020.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the cognizance of the chargesheet by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pratapgarh in the present case is violation of Secti
Mandatory nature of Section 195 Cr.P.C. and its specific bar on taking cognizance of offences indicated in the chargesheet under Section 188 of IPC in the absence of a written complaint by the author....
The main legal point established is that charges under Sections 188, 269, and 270 IPC cannot be initiated without a written complaint as per Section 195 of CrPC, and the court has the inherent jurisd....
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
