Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
J.SREENIVAS RAO
Potta Rajaiah – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. commencement of criminal proceedings. (Para 1) |
| 2. procedural adherence in summoning. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. importance of judicial scrutiny on cognizance. (Para 5 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. quashing of improper cognizance orders. (Para 10) |
| 5. final disposition of the criminal petition. (Para 11) |
ORDER
This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 13 seeking to quash the proceedings in SC.POCSO.No.239 of 2021 pending on the file of the 2nd Fast Track Special Court for Trial of Rape and POCSO Act cases, Bhongir, Yadadri-Bhuvanagiri District, for the offences punishable under Sections 143 , 324, 323, 504 and 509 read with 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘ IPC ’) and Section 12 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012.
2. Heard Sri Pulimamidi Rohith Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Jithendar Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1.
3. With the consent of both the learned counsel, the criminal petition is disposed of at the admission stage on the ground that even according to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the matter before the learned Trial Court has not riped for the tria
The court established that a Magistrate must apply judicial consideration and provide reasoning before taking cognizance of offences, as mere summoning without such scrutiny is improper.
Cognizance of offences by a Magistrate requires application of mind and proper reasoning; mechanical issuance of summons is impermissible.
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
