K N Surendra vs The State Of Karnataka on 26 October, 2018
He also relied upon the decision of the
Division Bench of this Court in the case of Asim Shariff
Vs. National Investigating Agency, in Criminal
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 2 of 2 (0.98 seconds)Documents citing
Asim Shariff vs National Investigating Agency on 8 March, 2018
Smt.Shila Devi vs State Of U.P And Another on 16 March, 2022
"Taking not of the exposition of law on the subject laid down by this Court, it is settled that the judge while considering the question of framing charge under Section 227 Cr.P.C. in sessions cases (which is akin to section 239 Cr.P.C. pertaining to warrant cases) has the undoubted power to sift and weigh the evidence for the limited purpose of finding out whether or not a prima facie case against the accused has been made out: where the material placed before the court discloses grave suspicion against the accused which has not been properly explained, the court will be fully justified in framing the charge; by and large if two views are possible and one of them giving rise to suspicion only as distinguish from grave suspicion against the accused the trial judge will be justified in discharging him. It is thus clear that while examining the discharge application filed under Section 227 Cr.P.C., it is expected from the trial judge to exercise its judicial mind to determine as to whether a case for trial has been made out or not. It is true that in such proceedings, the court is not supposed to hold a mini trial by marshalling the evidence on record.
1