Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.55 seconds)

M/S.Thirupathi Traders vs S.Nazarudheen

On that date, the particulars of offence was read over and explained to the accused and thereby virtually framed the charge. Then on 25-07-2011, the first prosecution witness was examined and certain documents were marked. It was adjourned for cross examination to a further date. Learned counsel for the petitioner based on Annexure 3 Crl.M.C No.3759 of 2012 7 submitted that addition of the petitioner as accused in the crime is in violation of the procedure set out in the Cr.P.C. Section 20A of the P.F.A Act referred to above clearly shows that addition of the accused under that provision could be done only on appreciation of the evidence adduced before it during the trial. It is beyond any pale of dispute that the trial in a warrant case commences only on framing charges. Here, the charge, as per the record, was framed without complying with the procedure in Section 244 Cr.P.C. Therefore, the impleadment of the petitioner as an additional accused is in disregard of the provisions of the Code.
Kerala High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - A Hariprasad - Full Document
1