Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 12 (0.39 seconds)Smt.Baijanti Bai vs Madhya Pradesh Kshetriya Vidhut Vitran ... on 24 June, 2014
The Magistrate can
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH,
BENCH AT GWALIOR
M.Cr.C. No.31199/2021
(Smt. Baijanti Bai Vs. State of M.P. & Ors.)
(5)
also monitor the investigation, though he cannot himself
investigate (as investigation is the job of the police).
Parties may produce any material they wish before the
Magistrate concerned. The learned Magistrate shall be
uninfluenced by any observation in the impugned order
of the High Court."
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Sakiri Vasu vs State Of U.P. And Others on 7 December, 2007
In view of the settled position in Sakiri Vasu case, the
impugned judgment of the High Court cannot be
sustained and is hereby set aside. The Magistrate
concerned is directed to ensure proper investigation into
the alleged offence under Section 156(3) CrPC and if he
deems it necessary, he can also recommend to the
SSP/SP concerned a change of the investigating officer,
so that a proper investigation is done.
Shweta Bhadauriya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Thr on 21 June, 2016
(Emphasis supplied)
In congruence with the aforesaid well settled position, a
Division Bench of this Court has taken a similar view in the case of
Shweta Bhadoriya Vs. State of M.P. & others (2017 (1) MPLJ
(Cri) 338)).
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 36 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
M. Subramaniam vs S. Janaki on 20 March, 2020
(Emphasis supplied)
Recently the Apex Court in the case of M.Subramaniam Vs. S.
Janaki (Cr.A. No.102 of 2011) decided on 20/3/2020, has held as
under:-