Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.21 seconds)
Mafidan Bewa vs The State Of Jharkhand on 19 July, 2017 cites

Commissioner Of Income-Tax, New ... vs East West Import & Export (P) Ltd.,(Now ... on 8 February, 1989

"40. Even the word "course" occurring in Section 319 CrPC, clearly indicates that the power can be exercised only during the period when the inquiry has been commenced and is going on or the trial which has commenced and is going on. It covers the entire wide range of the process of the pre-trial and the trial stage. The word "course" therefore, allows the court to invoke this power to proceed against any person from the initial stage of inquiry up to the stage of the conclusion of the trial. The court does not become functus officio even if cognizance is taken so far as it is looking into the material qua any other person who is not an accused. The word "course" ordinarily conveys a meaning of a continuous progress from one point to the next in time and conveys the idea of a period of time: duration and not a fixed point of time. (See CIT v. East West Import & Export (P) Ltd.)
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 633 - M Rangnath - Full Document

Shashikant Singh vs Tarkeshwar Singh & Anr on 24 April, 2002

15. Therefore the mandate of Section 319 Cr.P.C.is with respect to the trying of the case of newly made accused with the accused who is already facing trial is not mandatory in nature, as the word used is 'could be' and not 'must be' as has been indicated in the case of Shashikant Singh (supra). In 7. such circumstances, therefore, it was not mandatory on the part of the trial court not to pronounce judgment in the case of other accused person until and unless the trial with respect to the newly made accused is concluded.
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 103 - U C Banerjee - Full Document
1