In the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate of Tirupur
CMP.NO :
S.C.NO:110/2013
Ganeswaran petitioners/Accused
Verus
Senapthy Repondent/Complainant
PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 202(2) R/W 208 OF CR.P.C.
1. The above case was taken cognizance for an offence under 307 of I.P.C. on the basis of a private complaint filed by one Senapathy and the same has been committed to this Honorable court for trial.
2. The learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence after examining the complainant on oath and committed the case. All the witnesses cited in the private complaint ware not examined by the learned Magistrate.
3. As in police case ,the accused is entitled to have the copies of sworn statement of witnesses examined before the committal and the document relied by the complainant so as to enable the accused to prepare his defense.
4. After framing chare the complainant was examined as Pw1. Now the case stands posted for examination of other witnesses cited in the complaint.
5. The petitioner / Accused submits that the committal Magistrate has not followed the provisions under section 202(2) proviso of Cr.pc . the principle behind the provisions of under section 202(2) proviso of Cr.pc is that the accused should not be taken by surprise at the trial (sessions Trial) by the examination of witnesses who has not been examined on oath by the Magistrate before passing committal order. As in the police case, the statement of witnesses to be examined in a case filed by a private complaint cannot be made available to the accused, unless the complainant and his witnesses are first examined by the committal court. The examination of witnesses in the session’s trial who were not examined on oath by the Magistrate before committal would cause great prejudice to the accused .
6. The witnesses proposed to be examined by the prosecution further cannot be examined for the reason they were not examined on oath by the Magistrate before committal.
7. Unless what the proposed witnesses going to depose is made known to the accused earlier , their examination as a witness as a witness is not permitted under law as being against the principles of Natural Justice and the mandatory provisions of section 202(2) of Cr.pc.
8. Without complying with the provision of section 202 (2) proviso of Cr.pc, if any witnesses are examined during sessions trial which is nothing but sheer violation of law and illegal.
9. Therefore it is prayed that this Honorable court may be pleased to direct the prosecution not to examine any witnesses who were not been examined by the magistrate before committal and pass other suitable order in this regard and render justice.
Advocate for accused
(This is petition. I need counter petition)? With ruling
Shivjee Singh vs Nagendra Tiwary & Ors on 6 July, 2010
In the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate of Tirupur
CMP.NO :
S.C.NO:110/2013
Ganeswaran petitioners/Accused
Verus
Senapthy Repondent/Complainant
PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 202(2) R/W 208 OF CR.P.C.
1. The above case was taken cognizance for an offence under 307 of I.P.C. on the basis of a private complaint filed by one Senapathy and the same has been committed to this Honorable court for trial.
2. The learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence after examining the complainant on oath and committed the case. All the witnesses cited in the private complaint ware not examined by the learned Magistrate.
3. As in police case ,the accused is entitled to have the copies of sworn statement of witnesses examined before the committal and the document relied by the complainant so as to enable the accused to prepare his defense.
4. After framing chare the complainant was examined as Pw1. Now the case stands posted for examination of other witnesses cited in the complaint.
5. The petitioner / Accused submits that the committal Magistrate has not followed the provisions under section 202(2) proviso of Cr.pc . the principle behind the provisions of under section 202(2) proviso of Cr.pc is that the accused should not be taken by surprise at the trial (sessions Trial) by the examination of witnesses who has not been examined on oath by the Magistrate before passing committal order. As in the police case, the statement of witnesses to be examined in a case filed by a private complaint cannot be made available to the accused, unless the complainant and his witnesses are first examined by the committal court. The examination of witnesses in the session’s trial who were not examined on oath by the Magistrate before committal would cause great prejudice to the accused .
6. The witnesses proposed to be examined by the prosecution further cannot be examined for the reason they were not examined on oath by the Magistrate before committal.
7. Unless what the proposed witnesses going to depose is made known to the accused earlier , their examination as a witness as a witness is not permitted under law as being against the principles of Natural Justice and the mandatory provisions of section 202(2) of Cr.pc.
8. Without complying with the provision of section 202 (2) proviso of Cr.pc, if any witnesses are examined during sessions trial which is nothing but sheer violation of law and illegal.
9. Therefore it is prayed that this Honorable court may be pleased to direct the prosecution not to examine any witnesses who were not been examined by the magistrate before committal and pass other suitable order in this regard and render justice.
Advocate for accused
(This is petition. I need counter petition)? With ruling
Shivjee Singh vs Nagendra Tiwary & Ors on 6 July, 2010
