Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 25 (0.29 seconds)Section 202 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 23 in The Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 190 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Section 200 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 173 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Narayandas Bhagwandas Madhavdas vs The State Of West Bengal on 7 May, 1959
In Narayandas Bhagwandas Madhavdas v. The State of West
Bengal (AIR 1959 SC 1118) it was observed as under:
Superintendent And Remembrancer Of ... vs Abani Kumar Banerjee on 9 May, 1950
Numerous cases
were cited before us in support of the
submissions made on behalf of the appellants.
Certain submissions were also made as to what
is meant by "taking cognizance." It is
unnecessary to refer to the cases cited. The
following observations of Mr. Justice Das
Gupta in the case of Superintendent and
Remembrancer of Legal Affairs, West Bengal v.
Abani Kumar Banerjee, AIR 1950 Cal 437
"What is taking cognizance has
not been defined in the Criminal
Procedure Code and I have no desire
to attempt to define it. It seems to
me clear however that before it can
be said that any magistrate has
taken cognizance of any offence
under Section 190(1)(a), Criminal
Procedure Code, he must not only
have applied his mind to the
contents of the petition but he must
have done so for the purpose of
proceeding in a particular way as
indicated in the subsequent
provisions of this Chapter-
R.R. Chari vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh on 19 March, 1951
It is, however, argued that in Chari's case
this Court was dealing with a matter which
came under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
It seems to us, however, that that makes no
difference. It is the principle which was
enunciated by Das Gupta, J., which was
approved. As to when cognizance is taken of
an offence will depend upon the facts and
circumstances of each case and it is
impossible to attempt to define what is meant
by taking cognizance. Issuing of a search
warrant for the purpose of an investigation
or of a warrant of arrest for that purposes
cannot by themselves be regarded as acts by
which cognizance was taken of an offence.
Obviously, it is only when a Magistrate
applies his mind for the purpose of
proceeding under s. 200 and subsequent
sections of Chapter XVI of the Code of
Criminal Procedure or under s. 204 of Chapter
XVII of the Code that it can be positively
stated that he had applied his mind and
therefore had taken cognizance."