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

1957 Supreme(MP) 42

NEVASKAR
CHATURBHUJ – Appellant
Versus
NAHARKHAN – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
J.D.PATEL

NEVASKAR, J.

( 1 ) A complaint was filed by one Naharkhan son of Ghasikhan Musalman of babrecha against the accused Chaturbhuj son of Kishanji of the same place under section 211, I. P. C. The Magistrate examined the complainant but without complying with the mandatory provisions of Section 204 (1-A) and (1-B ). He directed issue of process against the accused. Accused preferred revision petition in the Court of the Sessions Judge, Ratlam. The revision petition was heard by the additional Sessions Judge, Ratlam. According to the learned Additional Sessions judge it was not competent for the Magistrate to issue process without complying with the mandatory provisions in Section 204 (1-A) and (1-B ). He, therefore, has made this reference.

( 2 ) A petition has been filed in this Court purporting to have been signed by the accused Chaturbhuj and the complainant Naharkhan stating that they had compromised the matter out of Court and that for that reason, the proceeding may be dismissed. The complaint in the present case relates to an offence under section 211, I. P. C. , which is not a compoundable offence. Under these circumstances I cannot take notice of this petition. Neither Chaturb


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