CHAPTER XVI COMMENCEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE MAGISTRATES Sec. 204: Issue of process

World News

If in the opinion of a Magistrate taking cognizance of an offence there is sufficient ground for proceeding, and the case appears to be-
A summons-case, he shall issue his summons for the attendance of the accused, or
A warrant-case, he shall issue a warrant, or, if he thinks fit, a summons, for causing the accused to be brought or to appear at a certain time before such Magistrate or (if he has no jurisdiction himself) some other Magistrate having jurisdiction.

No summons or warrant shall be issued against the accused under sub-section (1) until a list of the prosecution witnesses has been filed.

In a proceeding instituted upon a complaint made in writing, every summons or warrant issued under sub-section (1) shall be accompanied by a copy of such complaint.

When by any law for the time being in force any process-fees or other fees are payable, no process shall be issued until the fees are paid and, if such fees are not paid within reasonable time, the Magistrate may dismiss the complaint.

Nothing in this section shall be deemed to affect the provisions of section 87.

Reportable
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1920 OF 2019
KANWAR PAL SINGH
VERSUS
THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER
In view of the aforesaid discussion, we would uphold the order of the High Court refusing to set aside the prosecution and cognizance of the offence taken by the learned Magistrate under Section 379 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the prevention of Damage to Public Property Act. We would, however, clarify that prosecution and cognizance under Section 21 read with Section 4 of the Mines Regulation Act will not be valid and justified in the absence of the authorization. Further, our observations in deciding and answering the legal issue before us should not be treated as findings on the factual allegations made in the complaint. The trial court would independently apply its mind to the factual allegations and decide the charge in accordance with law. In light of the aforesaid observations, the appeal is partly allowed, as we have upheld the prosecution and cognizance of the offence under Section 379 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act. There would be no order as to costs.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *