Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 1]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

Surinder Singh vs Baljit Kaur on 7 April, 2014

V                                               1

                    IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

                  CRIMINAL     APPELLATE JURISDICTION

             CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 832     OF 2014
      (arising out of S.L.P. (Criminal) No.9943 of 2012)


SURINDER SINGH                                                  Appellant (s)

                                           VERSUS

BALJIT KAUR & ANR.                                              Respondent(s)

                               O     R      D        E    R

               Leave granted.

2.             The High Court has considered the matter in

its     jurisdiction     under             Section        482   of     the     Code    of

Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, ’Cr.P.C.’) whether

or not the offence is proved against the respondents.

Whereas the High Court’s approach ought to have been

whether there were sufficient grounds for proceeding

against the respondents.

3.             It is pertinent to notice that the Magistrate,

after recording the statement of the complainant under

Section 200 Cr.P.C., issued process to the respondents.

4.             When that order was challenged before the High

Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court should

not     have     travelled     beyond               the   consideration         of    the

question whether there was sufficient ground to proceed

against the respondent.
                                     2



5.       The approach of the High Court is flawed and

cannot be sustained.

6.       Consequently, Appeal is allowed. The impugned

order is set aside.

7.       The      Magistrate       shall     now      proceed   with     the

case. It is, however, made clear that the respondents

shall be at liberty to request the Magistrate for their

discharge at the time of framing of charge.
                                 .........................J.
                                 ( R.M. LODHA )



NEW DELHI;                       .........................J.
APRIL 7, 2014                    ( KURIAN JOSEPH )
                                                3

ITEM NO.46                          COURT NO.2                        SECTION IIB

                S U P R E M E          C O U R T   O F    I N D I A
                                    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl) No(s).9943/2012

(From   the judgement    and order      dated   13/07/2012 in    CRLM
No.31599/2010 of The HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH)

SURINDER SINGH                                                          Petitioner(s)

                     VERSUS

BALJIT KAUR & ANR.                                                      Respondent(s)

(With appln(s) for stay and office report ))

Date: 07/04/2014      This Petition was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :
          HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R.M. LODHA
          HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH


For Petitioner(s)             Mr.      K.G. Bhagat, Adv.
                              Ms.      Divya Shukla, Adv.
                              Dr.      Dinesh Singh, Adv.
                              Ms.      Neha Jain, Adv.
                              Mr.      Vineet Bhagat,Adv.


For Respondent(s)             Mr. Hrishikesh Baruah,Adv.
                              Mr. Gurmohan Singh Bedi, Adv.

               UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
                                   O R D E R

Leave granted.

Appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order.

(Rajesh Dham) (Renu Diwan) Court Master Court Master (signed order is placed on the file)