| Topics |
Headnote |
Judgement |
| CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 |
|
PDF |
| CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 |
CrPC — Investigation — Discovery of subsequent material — Investigating Machinery — Power of — Held, the investigating machinery has been empowered that even after filing a report, if the investigating officer comes to possession of further information or material — there is no need to register a fresh FIR — as the investigating officer is empowered to make further investigation of course with the leave of the Court and can form and submit further report. (Para 14) |
PDF |
| CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 |
CrPC — Power to Investing Agency under — Held, ample power is invested under Cr.P.C. in the investigating machinery to look into in detail, inquire and investigate all the circumstances encircling the main offence which is alleged to have been committed. (Para 13) |
PDF |
| CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 |
CrPC — S 154 — Second FIR — there can be no need to entertain the second FIR almost on a similar set of circumstance. (Para 14) |
PDF |
| CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 |
CrPC — S 154 — Second complaint — Permitting of — The Court cannot presume that investigating machinery will not conduct free and fair investigation in response to the complaint which is very much before it in the form of first complaint. (Para 20) |
PDF |
| CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 |
CrPC — S 154 — Second FIR — Addition of more accused — Held, merely because some more accused persons are added in the second complaint and some subsequent information is said to have been executed would not alter the situation — second complaint is not maintainable. (Para 20) |
PDF |
| CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 |
CrPC — S 154 & 482 — Second complaint — Quashing — Test of 'sameness' — applied — Held, direct co-relation between second complaint & the original offence —to continue with the fresh investigation of the second complaint may turn out to be a mischief, coercion or harassment — Grievance of second complaint already ceased by the investigating machinery— there is no reason to allow subsequent complaint being investigated separately— Allegations are centering around the very same act of petitioner — subsequent acts, alleged in the second complaint are part of the very same transaction — Held, second complaint lodged appears to be a step impermissible in law—steps alleged in the second complaint are consequences of the act alleged — same is not acceptable as maintainable in law— Quashed. (Para 20, 21 & 24) |
PDF |
| CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 |
CrPC — S 154 — FIR — Value of — FIR is a very important piece of document — which sets the machinery of criminal law in motion and marks the commencement of investigation — which ends with the formation of opinion u/s 169 or 170 — and forwarding of a police report u/s 173 — CrPC — Ss 169,170 & 173. (Para 13) |
PDF |
| CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 |
CrPC — S 154 — FIR — is not a substantive piece of evidence — Its only use is to contradict or corroborate the matter thereof. (Para 13) |
PDF |
| CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 |
CrPC — S 154 — FIR — Essential ingredients of — The FIR must atleast contain some information about crime being committed — as also some information about the manner in which the cognizable offence has been committed. (Para 13) |
PDF |
| CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 |
CrPC — Ss 154 & 157 — Procedure for investigation — Scope — also postulated the place of inquiry ordinarily and therefore, the complaint need not contain every details about commission of offence and the detection thereof along with all information and inquiry is the bounden duty of investigating machinery. (Para 13) |
PDF |
| CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 |
CrPC — S 173 — Completion of investigation by the investigating agency — Final Report — Submission of — Even if after conclusion of investigation in response to the filing of FIR and submission of report under section 173(2) — the Officer in charge of Police Station comes across any further information pertaining to centring around the main issue — he can make further investigation normally with the leave of the Court — & forward further evidence, if collected, with further report or reports u/s 173(8). (Para 13) |
PDF |
| CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 |
CrPC — Ss 154 — FIR —Second complaint — Tenability of — Held, the concept of 'sameness' is required to be pressed into service — to find out whether both the FIRs relate to the same incident in respect of same occurrence — or are in regard to altogether different incident — under the normal circumstance — there can be no second FIR — and no fresh investigation on receipt of every subsequent information in respect of same cognizable offence — or same occurrence giving rise to one or more cognizable offence. (Para 13) |
PDF |
| CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 |
CrPC — S 154 — Second complaint — Maintainability of — The second complaint would be maintainable only in case where there are altogether different versions — different discovery of factual foundations and altogether new offence is said to have been committed — which has no nexus with the main offence contained in the first complaint. (Para 21) |
PDF |
| CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 |
CrPC — S 125 — Family Courts Act —Section 26 — DV Act — S 20 — Respondent not a legally wedded wife — No proof regarding dissolution of first marriage of respondent — Maintenance to minors — name of father of tried to be rectified — Second child — No convincing evidence to show that he was born to respondent from applicant— Held, case of the respondent is completely out of purview of the provisions of Section 125, CrPC & DV Act— Order quashed. (Para 13 & 14) |
PDF |
| CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 |
CrPC — S 172 — Investigation — Subsequent information — receipt of — Duty of Investigating Agency — Officer in charge of Police Station has to investigate not merely the cognizable offence reported in FIR — but also all other connected offences found to have been committed in the course of same transaction — or same occurrence and file one or more reports as provided u/s 173 — there can be no second FIR and no fresh investigation. (Para 13) |
PDF |
| CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 |
Evidence Act — S 3 — Relevant fact — FIR —Name of accused — not mentioned in the FIR — No role ascribed to accused— deposition in Court— Prosecution version not believable— CrPC — S 154. (Para 10 & 11) |
PDF |
| CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 |
CrPC — S 161 — Statement under — Omission in the police statement — non explanation by witness — Held, variance in her report immediately after incident, her statement & deposition in court is significant. (Para 12) |
PDF |
| CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 |
IPC — S 182 — CrPC — S 195 — Held, in order to prosecute an accused for an offence punishable u/s 182, IPC, it is mandatory to follow the procedure prescribed u/s 195, CrPC — else such action is rendered void ab initio. (Para 10) |
PDF |
| CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 |
CrPC — S 204 — Issuance of process — Scope — the section does not mandate the Magistrate to explicitly state the reasons for issuance of summons — It clearly indicates that in the opinion of a Magistrate taking cognizance of an offence, if there is sufficient ground for proceeding, then the summons may be issued. (Para 11) |
PDF |
| CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 |
CrPC — S 204 — Issuance of process — Scope — The Section mandates the Magistrate to form an opinion as to whether there exists a sufficient ground explicit narration of the same is mandatory. (Para 11) |
PDF |
| CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 |
CrPC — S 204 — Issuance of process — Nature of — Held, in any case, it is not a mechanical process or a matter of course — The steps taken by the Magistrate u/s 190(1)(a) followed by Sec. 204 should reflect that — Magistrate has applied his mind to the facts and the material placed on record — & he is satisfied that there is a ground for proceeding further in the matter — by asking the person against whom violation of law is alleged, to appear before the Court. (Para 11) |
PDF |
| CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 |
CrPC — S 204 — Issuance of process — Essential requirement —Held, there must be sufficient indication on the constituting commission of an offence. (Para 12) |
PDF |
| CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 |
CrPC — S 204 & 482 — Issuance of process — Quashing of — IPC — S 499 & 500 — Case filed by respondent on the ground of acquittal in a case of cheating filed on complaint of applicant — Process issued by Ld. Magistrate — Held, If acquittal is the only ground to attract the provisions of Sections 499 & 500 then in every case of acquittal such a case can be filed— This cannot be an object and purport of the provisions— there is no indication on application of mind by the learned Magistrate — The order of issuance of process is thus apparently unsustainable in law— Set aside. (Para 12) |
PDF |
| CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 |
CrPC — S 374 — Appeal against conviction — Duty of appellate Court — Held, the Court is required to scrutinize the evidence to ascertain whether there is proper, reliable and cogent evidence beyond reasonable doubt to confirm the judgment and sentence awarded by learned trial Court — If there is no such evidence on record — the conviction cannot be sustained as the onus lies on the prosecution to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. (Para 15) |
PDF |
| CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 |
Criminal Jurisprudence — CrPC — S 378 — Appeal against acquittal — Duty of the appellate Court — View taken by trial Court — when resulted in an acquittal — strengthens the presumption in favour of the accused — the same need not be upset. (Para 21) |
PDF |