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

2000 Supreme(Del) 846

R.S.SODHI
L. K. JAIN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF DELHI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
C.MUKHOPADHAYA, M.S.BUTALIA, MANISH KUMAR, P.CHIDAMBARAM, S.S.GANDHI

R. S. Sodhi

( 1 ) BY this application, the complainant seeks permission to be impleaded as party/respondent in the petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Learned senior counsel for the applicant submits that since a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the order taking cognizance of the case, it would be complainant s right to be heard because he is the affected party, who, in the first instance, filed the complaint. Pe draws my attention to Bhagwant Singh v. Commissioner of Police and another (1985) 2 SCC 537, where in the Supreme Court has held that:

"moreover, when the interest of the informant in prompt and effective action being taken on the First Information Report lodged by him is clearly recognized by the provisions contained in sub-section (2) of Section 154, sub-section (2) of Section 157 and sub-section (2) (ii) of Section 173, it must be presumed that the informant would equally be interested in seeing that the Magistrate takes cognizance of the offence and issues process, because that would be culmination of the First Information Report lodged by him. There can, therefore, be no doubt that when, on a cons







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