Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.22 seconds)Section 341 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
The State Of Punjab vs Jasbir Singh on 26 February, 2020
In the light
of the law laid down in The State of Punjab vs. Jasbir
Singh (supra), this Court is of the considered view that
the matter can be disposed of without issuing notice to
respondent No.1.
Kuldip Singh vs The State Of Punjab And Another on 15 February, 1956
NC: 2026:KHC:19954
WP No. 9321 of 2025
HC-KAR
Cr.P.C. would "ordinarily" lie either to the District Court or
to the High Court, and that the District Court being the
subordinate court amongst the two must be regarded as
the appropriate appellate authority, the said principle
squarely governs the case on hand. The test, as laid down,
is objective in nature and hinges upon the ordinary
appellate hierarchy of the court from which the order
emanates. Since the order impugned arises from the Court
of the Senior Civil Judge, whose decrees and orders
ordinarily lie in appeal before the District Court, the
Principal District Court alone would have the jurisdiction to
entertain an appeal under Section 341(1) Cr.P.C. Any
deviation from this settled position would run contrary to
the statutory scheme as well as the law declared by the
Hon'ble Apex Court in Kuldip Singh vs. State of Punjab
(supra). Consequently, the impugned order, having
overlooked the binding ratio and having assumed
jurisdiction contrary to law, suffers from patent illegality
and perversity.
Article 227 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
1