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

1959 Supreme(All) 180

M.C.DESAI
SHUBRATI KHAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ANAND SWAROOP MATHUR, GOPAL BEHARI, HASIN AHMAD

M. C. DESAI, J.

( 1 ) THE applicant is being prosecuted under the Motor Vehicles Act on a police report. The report contains the names of two witnesses to be examined for the prosecution; this is in compliance with Section 204 (1-A) which requires a list of witnesses. A summons was issued against the applicant and he appeared before the court and pleaded not guilty. The court started trial following the procedure prescribed in Sections 241 etc. Three witnesses were examined by the prosecution including the two mentioned in the report. The prosecution then applied for an adjournment to examine some more witnesses and in spite of the applicants protest, the court has issued summonses against them. The applicant challenges the courts order on the ground that the court had no jurisdiction to issue summonses against witnesses whose names were not to be found in the list given under Section 204 (1-A ). I do not find any force in the contention.

( 2 ) THE power of a Magistrate to summon witnesses in summons cases is fully and exhaustively laid down in Section 244. It contains no restriction upon his power, it does not restrict it to issuing summonses against the witnesses whose names are







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