{"id":321066,"date":"2024-04-30T14:30:47","date_gmt":"2024-04-30T09:00:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=321066"},"modified":"2024-06-15T12:35:03","modified_gmt":"2024-06-15T07:05:03","slug":"cognizance-by-magistrate-and-additional-sessions-judge-in-parts-is-not-legally-permissible-raj-hc-scc-times","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/30\/cognizance-by-magistrate-and-additional-sessions-judge-in-parts-is-not-legally-permissible-raj-hc-scc-times\/","title":{"rendered":"Cognizance taken by Magistrate and Additional Sessions Judge in parts is not legally permissible: Rajasthan High Court"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Rajasthan High Court:<\/span> In a criminal revision challenging the Additional Sessions Judge’s order taking cognizance against all accused, including petitioners, a single-judge bench comprising of Anoop Kumar Dhand, J., affirmed that after committal by the Magistrate, the Court of Sessions holds original jurisdiction and can take cognizance against accused persons not charged by the police. However, regarding the petitioners against whom cognizance was taken in parts by Magistrate and Additional Sessions Judge, the Court held such action is impermissible, as the same amounted to taking cognizance twice for different offenses by different courts at different stages.<\/p>\n

Brief Facts<\/p>\n

In the instant matter, the petitioners invoked the revisional jurisdiction under Section 397 read with Section 401<\/a> of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> (CrPC), challenging the legality of the order dated 11-02-2019 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jaipur, stemmed from criminal case, where the complainant filed an application under Section 193<\/a> CrPC<\/a> seeking cognizance against all accused, including petitioners. The impugned order allowed the application leading to the petitioners being charged under various sections of the Indian Penal Code<\/a> (IPC) and arrest warrants being issued against some of them.<\/p>\n

Moot Point<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. \n

    Whether Additional Sessions Judge can take cognizance against the petitioners 4 to 9 for offenses not included in the initial cognizance order?<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  2. \n

    Whether Additional Sessions Judge can take cognizance against the petitioners 1 to 3 again when the cognizance has already been taken against them by the Magistrate?<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Parties’ Contentions<\/p>\n

    The petitioners argued that the offense under Section 308<\/a> of IPC<\/a> was triable by the Court of Sessions, and thus, the case was committed accordingly. It was contended that once cognizance was taken against certain accused by the Magistrate, there was no justification for the Additional Sessions Judge to take cognizance again. It was argued that the impugned order amounted to a review of the previous order, which is impermissible under Section 362<\/a> of CrPC<\/a>. The petitioners asserted that there was no evidence against certain accused, and thus, the impugned order was not legally sustainable. Furthermore, the petitioners stated that there was insufficient evidence against petitioner 4 to 9 for taking cognizance, and the session court should have awaited the Section 319<\/a> CrPC<\/a> stage.<\/p>\n

    The respondents countered and stated that as per law, the Court of Sessions can take cognizance, not just of the offense but also of the offenders involved. It was argued that sufficient evidence existed against all accused, although the police only charged a subset of them. The respondents emphasised on the availability of evidence from statements and medical reports to establish a prima facie case against all accused and justifying the Additional Sessions Judge’s decision to allow the application.<\/p>\n

    Court’s Analysis<\/p>\n

    The Court addressed the two facets of the challenge to the impugned order. Firstly, regarding the cognizance taken against petitioners 4 to 9 and secondly, concerning petitioners 1 to 3. The Court considered the conflicting views on the stage and power of taking cognizance under Section 193<\/a> CrPC<\/a>. The Court referred to Dharam Pal<\/span> v. State of Haryana<\/span>, (2004) 13 SCC 9<\/a> and Balveer Singh<\/span> v. State of Rajasthan<\/span>, (2016) 6 SCC 680<\/a>, to establish the Court of Sessions’ authority to take cognizance against accused persons not charge-sheeted by the police. Regarding the cognizance taken against petitioners 4 to 9, the Court upheld the order’s validity, citing the Sessions Court’s authority under Section 193<\/a> CrPC<\/a> to take cognizance against uncharged individuals. With regards to the cognizance taken against petitioners 1 to 3, the Court found that cognizance had already been taken by the Magistrate, and the subsequent order by the Additional Sessions Judge amounted to taking cognizance twice for the same offenses, which was impermissible under the law.<\/p>\n

    “No doubt, on committal of the case by the Magistrate to the Court of Sessions with reference to Section 209<\/a> Cr.P.C.<\/a>, the restrictions on the powers of Court of Sessions, including that of the Additional Sessions Judge, would get lifted as in that event the Court of Sessions\/Additional Sessions Judge would exercise such power as a Court of “original jurisdiction”.”<\/p>\n

    The Court held that a conjoint reading of Section 193<\/a> and 209<\/a> CrPC<\/a> makes it clear that where part cognizance is taken by the Magistrate and part cognizance is taken by the Additional Sessions Judge cannot be held to be legally permissible. The Court further held that that once cognizance was taken, it could not be revisited unless through specific legal provisions.<\/p>\n

    Court’s Decision<\/p>\n

    The Court held that the impugned order, insofar as it pertained to the petitioners already charged by the Magistrate, was not legally sustainable and liable to be set aside. However, the Court upheld the order concerning the petitioners not previously charged, as there was prima facie evidence against them.<\/p>\n

    [Laxman Singh<\/span> v. State of Rajasthan<\/span>, 2024 SCC OnLine Raj 974<\/a>, order dated 23-04-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

    Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n

    Mr. Rajveer Singh and Mr. P L Saini, Counsel for the Petitioners<\/p>\n

    Mr. Atul Sharma, PP, Mr. Sankalp Sogani, and Ms. Muskan Verma, Counsel for the Respondents<\/p>\n

    Buy Penal Code, 1860   HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

    \"penal<\/a><\/p>\n

    Buy Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973  HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

    \"Code<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    “Criminal law serves the purpose of maintaining law and order by providing predictability. It protects individual rights …Criminal law deals with offences and helps to protect the society from falling into the state of anarchy.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67514,"featured_media":314824,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[68122,68123,13671,66973,2575],"class_list":["post-321066","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-cognizance-by-magistrate","tag-cognizance-by-sessions-judge","tag-criminal-procedure-code","tag-justice-anoop-kumar-dhand","tag-Rajasthan_High_Court"],"yoast_head":"\nCognizance by Magistrate and Additional Sessions Judge in parts is not legally permissible: Rajasthan High Court | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Rajasthan High Court held that Cognizance by Magistrate and Additional Sessions Judge in parts is not legally permissible.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/30\/cognizance-by-magistrate-and-additional-sessions-judge-in-parts-is-not-legally-permissible-raj-hc-scc-times\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Cognizance taken by Magistrate and Additional Sessions Judge in parts is not legally permissible: Rajasthan High Court\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Rajasthan High Court held that Cognizance by Magistrate and Additional Sessions Judge in parts is not legally permissible.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/30\/cognizance-by-magistrate-and-additional-sessions-judge-in-parts-is-not-legally-permissible-raj-hc-scc-times\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2024-04-30T09:00:47+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2024-06-15T07:05:03+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Rajasthan-High-Court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"591\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Ritu\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Cognizance taken by Magistrate and Additional Sessions Judge in parts is not legally permissible: Rajasthan High Court\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Ritu\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/30\/cognizance-by-magistrate-and-additional-sessions-judge-in-parts-is-not-legally-permissible-raj-hc-scc-times\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/30\/cognizance-by-magistrate-and-additional-sessions-judge-in-parts-is-not-legally-permissible-raj-hc-scc-times\/\",\"name\":\"Cognizance by Magistrate and Additional Sessions Judge in parts is not legally permissible: Rajasthan High Court | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/30\/cognizance-by-magistrate-and-additional-sessions-judge-in-parts-is-not-legally-permissible-raj-hc-scc-times\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/30\/cognizance-by-magistrate-and-additional-sessions-judge-in-parts-is-not-legally-permissible-raj-hc-scc-times\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Rajasthan-High-Court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-04-30T09:00:47+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-06-15T07:05:03+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9\"},\"description\":\"Rajasthan High Court held that Cognizance by Magistrate and Additional Sessions Judge in parts is not legally permissible.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/30\/cognizance-by-magistrate-and-additional-sessions-judge-in-parts-is-not-legally-permissible-raj-hc-scc-times\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/30\/cognizance-by-magistrate-and-additional-sessions-judge-in-parts-is-not-legally-permissible-raj-hc-scc-times\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/30\/cognizance-by-magistrate-and-additional-sessions-judge-in-parts-is-not-legally-permissible-raj-hc-scc-times\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Rajasthan-High-Court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Rajasthan-High-Court.webp\",\"width\":887,\"height\":591,\"caption\":\"Rajasthan High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/30\/cognizance-by-magistrate-and-additional-sessions-judge-in-parts-is-not-legally-permissible-raj-hc-scc-times\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Cognizance taken by Magistrate and Additional Sessions Judge in parts is not legally permissible: Rajasthan High Court\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9\",\"name\":\"Ritu\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Ritu\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_7\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Cognizance by Magistrate and Additional Sessions Judge in parts is not legally permissible: Rajasthan High Court | SCC Times","description":"Rajasthan High Court held that Cognizance by Magistrate and Additional Sessions Judge in parts is not legally permissible.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/30\/cognizance-by-magistrate-and-additional-sessions-judge-in-parts-is-not-legally-permissible-raj-hc-scc-times\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Cognizance taken by Magistrate and Additional Sessions Judge in parts is not legally permissible: Rajasthan High Court","og_description":"Rajasthan High Court held that Cognizance by Magistrate and Additional Sessions Judge in parts is not legally permissible.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/30\/cognizance-by-magistrate-and-additional-sessions-judge-in-parts-is-not-legally-permissible-raj-hc-scc-times\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2024-04-30T09:00:47+00:00","article_modified_time":"2024-06-15T07:05:03+00:00","og_image":[{"width":887,"height":591,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Rajasthan-High-Court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Ritu","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Cognizance taken by Magistrate and Additional Sessions Judge in parts is not legally permissible: Rajasthan High Court","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Ritu","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/30\/cognizance-by-magistrate-and-additional-sessions-judge-in-parts-is-not-legally-permissible-raj-hc-scc-times\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/30\/cognizance-by-magistrate-and-additional-sessions-judge-in-parts-is-not-legally-permissible-raj-hc-scc-times\/","name":"Cognizance by Magistrate and Additional Sessions Judge in parts is not legally permissible: Rajasthan High Court | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/30\/cognizance-by-magistrate-and-additional-sessions-judge-in-parts-is-not-legally-permissible-raj-hc-scc-times\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/30\/cognizance-by-magistrate-and-additional-sessions-judge-in-parts-is-not-legally-permissible-raj-hc-scc-times\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Rajasthan-High-Court.webp","datePublished":"2024-04-30T09:00:47+00:00","dateModified":"2024-06-15T07:05:03+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9"},"description":"Rajasthan High Court held that Cognizance by Magistrate and Additional Sessions Judge in parts is not legally permissible.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/30\/cognizance-by-magistrate-and-additional-sessions-judge-in-parts-is-not-legally-permissible-raj-hc-scc-times\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/30\/cognizance-by-magistrate-and-additional-sessions-judge-in-parts-is-not-legally-permissible-raj-hc-scc-times\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/30\/cognizance-by-magistrate-and-additional-sessions-judge-in-parts-is-not-legally-permissible-raj-hc-scc-times\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Rajasthan-High-Court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Rajasthan-High-Court.webp","width":887,"height":591,"caption":"Rajasthan High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/30\/cognizance-by-magistrate-and-additional-sessions-judge-in-parts-is-not-legally-permissible-raj-hc-scc-times\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Cognizance taken by Magistrate and Additional Sessions Judge in parts is not legally permissible: Rajasthan High Court"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9","name":"Ritu","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Ritu"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_7\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Rajasthan-High-Court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":46191,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/05\/13\/court-of-sessions-has-revisional-power-if-the-magistrate-refuses-to-take-cognizance-of-a-matter\/","url_meta":{"origin":321066,"position":0},"title":"Court of Sessions has revisional power if the Magistrate refuses to take cognizance of a matter","author":"Sucheta","date":"May 13, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The case before the bench comprising of A.K. Sikri & R.K Agarwal,JJ was whether the Court of Sessions is empowered to take the cognizance of offence when a similar application to this effect was rejected by the Judicial Magistrate while committing the case to Sessions Court, taking cognizance\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":239687,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/26\/kar-hc-whether-magistrate-is-required-to-give-elaborate-reasons-for-taking-cognizance-and-summoning-the-accused-in-view-of-report-under-s-173-cr-pc-legal-position-discussed\/","url_meta":{"origin":321066,"position":1},"title":"Kar HC | Whether Magistrate is required to give elaborate reasons for taking cognizance and summoning the accused in view of report under S. 173 CrPC? Legal position discussed","author":"Editor","date":"November 26, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Karnataka High Court: Michael Cunha J., dismissed the writ petition being found that the criminal action was rightly initiated against the petitioner. This instant petition was filed under Article 226 and 227 of Constitution of India read with Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 seeking to quash the charge\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":257514,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/11\/22\/legality-of-remand\/","url_meta":{"origin":321066,"position":2},"title":"The Legality of Remand after Completion of Investigation and before Taking Cognizance","author":"Editor","date":"November 22, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"by Gaurav Thote*","rel":"","context":"In "Op Eds"","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image-116-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image-116-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image-116-1.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x"},"classes":[]},{"id":299124,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/11\/delhi-hc-emphasizes-on-non-compliance-of-s195-of-crpc-directs-issuance-of-guidelines\/","url_meta":{"origin":321066,"position":3},"title":"Delhi High Court directs issuance of guidelines to address non-compliance of Section 195 of CrPC","author":"Editor","date":"August 11, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe concerned public servant should have prepared a complaint under Section 195 CrPC and the same should have been filed before the Magistrate or the same could have been forwarded along with the chargesheet to the concerned Court.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"delhi high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":291187,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/05\/03\/no-name-in-fir-chargesheet-magistrate-can-summon-accused-if-involvement-found-allahabad-high-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":321066,"position":4},"title":"In case of prima facie involvement, summon can be issued even in absence of name in police report or FIR: Allahabad HC reiterates","author":"Apoorva","date":"May 3, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Allahabad High Court said that the Magistrate is not bound in such a situation to follow the procedure laid down in Sections 200 and 202 of CrPC for taking cognizance of a case under Section 190(1)(a), though, it is open to him to act under Section 200 or Section 202\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"allahabad high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/allahabad-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/allahabad-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/allahabad-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/allahabad-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":223052,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/12\/10\/sikkim-hc-a-magistrate-is-obligated-to-inquire-into-the-case-for-finding-sufficient-grounds-before-summoning-accused-beyond-his-territorial-jurisdiction\/","url_meta":{"origin":321066,"position":5},"title":"Sikkim HC | A Magistrate is obligated to inquire into the case for finding sufficient grounds before summoning accused beyond his territorial jurisdiction","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"December 10, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Sikkim High Court:\u00a0Bhaskar Raj Pradhan, J., while exercising inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC quashed the criminal complaint filed against the petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 405, 420 and 441 read with Section 120-B IPC. Warrants issued against the petitioners by the Magistrate in the same case were\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/321066","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67514"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=321066"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/321066\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/314824"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=321066"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=321066"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=321066"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}