Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 14 (0.32 seconds)

Irshad Khan And Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 2 August, 2013

The learned Magistrate on the final report adopting the procedure prescribed under Section 190(1)(b) has again taken cognizance of the offence. He committed serious illegality in placing reliance upon the statement of witnesses earlier recorded by him under Sections 200 & 202 Cr.P.C. while taking cognizance on the final report/protest petition and summoning the accused/revisionist. Learned counsel further contended that while taking cognizance under Section 190(1)(b) of the Code, the Magistrate can act only upon the statements of witnesses recorded by the police in the case diary and it was not permissible for him at that stage to make use of any other material. Learned counsel placed reliance in the case of Irshad Khan and others Vs. State of U.P. and another 2013 LawSuit (All) 3146.
Allahabad High Court Cites 21 - Cited by 2 - H S Yadav - Full Document

Vadilal Panchal vs Dattatraya Dulaji Ghadigaonker And ... on 6 May, 1960

In Vadilal Panchal Vs. Dattatraya AIR 1960 SC 1113, it has been held that this Section does not mean that the Magistrate is bound to accept the result of the inquiry or investigation or that he must accept any plea that is setup on behalf of the person complained against. The Magistrate must apply his judicial mind to the materials on which he has to form his judgment.
Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 1023 - S K Das - Full Document
1   2 Next