Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 19 (0.45 seconds)

Yogendra Yadav & Ors vs State Of Jharkhand & Anr on 21 July, 2014

4. Sri H. N. Singh, learned Sr. Advocate appearing for the opposite party no. 2 as well as learned A.G.A. argued that although power conferred under Section 319 Cr.P.C. was exercised by the court below at the stage of the argument after a gap of about 14 years yet there is sufficient evidence against the revisionists to proceed with the trial. Delay in moving the application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. does not create any bar to exercise jurisdiction under Section 319 Cr.P.C. It is further argued that facts mentioned in FIR was written down in the presence and on dictation of police. Involvement of the revisionists in the present matter is supported with the statement of P.W.-1., P.W.-2 and P.W-3 made before the court below on oath. A lengthy cross examination has also been made from the witnesses. All the requirement to exercise jurisdiction under Section 319 Cr.P.C. are available in the present matter. There is no illegality, infirmity or perversity in the impugned order. A prima facie case is made out. There was no occasion to issue notice to the present revisionists for hearing on the application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. Ratio laid down in Jogendra Yadav case (Supra) is only regarding availability of opportunity under Section 227 Cr.P.C. to the accused summoned on the application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. to face trial.
Supreme Court of India Cites 23 - Cited by 1270 - Full Document
1   2 Next