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

1964 Supreme(Online)(Cal) 3

CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
R. Basak, J
Jyotijiban Ghosh – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Nikhil Chandra Talukdar
For the Respondents: Mr. Jitendra Mohan Banerjee

1. This Rule was issued upon an application made by one of the accused persons in a criminal case pending before a Magistrate at Sealdah in which charges have been framed against three accused persons for alleged offences under S.147, S.323 and S.341 of the Indian Penal code. The prayer in the Rule is for quashing the charges tramea against the petitioner Jyotijiban Ghosh. It has to be observed that, in the certified copy of the charge filed with the petition in this Court, the name of Jyotijiban Ghosh Has been wrongly mentioned as Jyotijiban Shah. That bespeaks of carelessness with which the copy was compared and certified to be a true copy in the Magistrate's Court.

2. Appearing in support of the Rule, the learned Advocate Mr. Nikhil Chandra talukdar has urged that the case having been instituted upon a police report the procedure under S.251A of the Code of Criminal Procedure was followed and, for framing the charges under the provisions of S.251A(3), the materials before the Magistrate were only the documents, copies of which had been given under the provisions of S.173(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure , that is, the First Information Report and the statements recorded by

















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