Pre-cognizance stage - accused can not be heard

What she will say man? She go sit inside, as simple as that.  All that drama story all in Famly Court, where judge is eagerly waiting to hear such stories.

Here direct imprisonment.

@ Helping Hand, 

kya pooch raha hoo mai ... kya kah rahe ho aap !

Mr.Amit,

you should be thankful the advocates who answers your query dont be annoyed.

Here advocate come to help people but never expect such reply. If u dont behave like genuine person then go and spend money to find your query.

Without giving any chance of hearing how court can decide your application??????

Are you a God who will say everything very true????

For any application, court has to opt procedure, they have to ask the other party whether you are putting right question or not and no judgment can stop any judge to do so.

@Amit, your question is raising a very interesting point.  Even though you have not mentioned that your application, I presume, has been filed under Section 340 Cr.P.C.  If that is so, the first question arises that as per that particular section, are you entitled to file such an application in appellate court or you are entitled to file it only in trial court.  If the answer to the question is that you can file it only in trial court, then whether it can be filed after conclusion of the trial or it has to be filed during the trial.  These legal questions require to be answered and so the court might have reverted to the other party to respond to these legal questions.

Answering to your pointed question, generally the private complaints are filed under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and in such cases, till the court taks cognizance and issue a notice to the accused, accused does not have any right to say any thing in the stage of "pre-summon evidence".  But this settled law may not be applicable in Section 340 Cr.P.C. as this particular section is procedural as well as substantive in nature.  Pl. Refer Marwah Vs. Marwah, Supreme Court decision on section 340, which may solve some of your problems.

Kamal ji, 

helping hand is my friend.

i didnt mean anything offending.

take it easy ! :)

after conclusion of trial, its the appeallate court who can take cognizance.

i think, since the dispute is of PRIVATE nature, the court has ordered OTHER SIDE TO SAY.

let them file SAY.

their SAY can not be read in evidence

:)

let her watch herself getting screwed now - and this is gonna happen in 2 courts - 2 different cases.

1)

Madras High Court

B.Jayachandran vs State Represented By on 15 October, 2009

11.In this matter, it is also made clear that though this Court heard the arguments of the learned counsel for

the proposed accused the settled position of law is very clear to the effect that the proposed accused persons

have no locus standi to raise their voice and object for registering the case.

2)

Supreme Court of India

Raghu Raj Singh Rousha vs M/S. Shivam Sundaram Promoters ... on 17 December, 2008

14. We may also notice that this Court in Vadilal Panchal v. Dattatraya Dulaji Ghadigaonkar and another

[AIR 1960 SC 1113], opined: "9. The general scheme of the aforesaid sections is quite clear. Section

200 says inter alia what a Magistrate taking cognisance of an offence on complaint shall do on receipt of such

a

complaint. Section 202 says that the Magistrate may, if he thinks fit, for reasons to be recorded in writing,

postpone the issue of process for

compelling the attendance of the person

complained against and direct an inquiry for the purpose of ascertaining the truth or falsehood of the

complaint; in other words, the scope of an inquiry under the section is limited to finding out the truth or

falsehood of the complaint in order to determine the question of the issue of process. The inquiry is for the

purpose of ascertaining the truth or falsehood of the complaint; that is, for ascertaining whether there is

evidence in support of the complaint so as to justify the issue of process and commencement of proceedings

against the person concerned. The section does not say that a regular trial for adjudging the guilt or otherwise

of the person complained against should take place at that stage; for the person complained against can be

legally called upon to answer the accusation made against him only when a process has issued and he is put on

trial.

16. It is in the aforementioned backdrop the decision of this Court in Chandra Deo Singh (supra) may be

considered. Therein, this Court opined that although an accused has no right to participate unless the process

is issued, he may remain present either in person or through a counsel or agent with a view to be informed of

what is going on. It was held that one of the objects behind the provisions of Section 202 of the Code is to

enable the 11

Magistrate to scrutinize carefully the allegations made in the complaint with a view to prevent a person named

therein as accused from being called upon to face an obviously frivolous complaint but that is not the stage

where defence of an accused can be gone into, stating: "...An enquiry under Section 202 can in no sense

be characterised as a trial for the simple reason that in law there can be but one trial for an offence. Permitting

an accused person to intervene during the enquiry would frustrate its very object and that is why the

legislature has made no specific provision permitting an accused person to take part in an enquiry.

It was emphasized that the question as to whether a process has to be issued or not lies within the exclusive

domain of the Magistrate so as to enable him to arrive at a satisfaction that there is sufficient ground for 12

proceeding but not with a view to see as to whether there is sufficient ground for conviction, stating:

"...No doubt, as stated in sub-section (1) of Section 202 itself, the object of the enquiry is to ascertain

the truth or falsehood of the complaint, but the Magistrate making the enquiry has to do this only with

reference to the intrinsic quality of the statements made before him at the enquiry which would naturally mean

the complaint itself, the statement on oath made by the complainant and the statements made before him by

persons examined at the instance of the complainant."

17. In Mohd. Yousuf (supra), whereupon reliance has been placed by Mr. Jaspal Singh, this Court made a

distinction between a pre-cognizance stage and post-cognizance stage.

You have not said under which section you filed the application in appellate court.  On the other hand you are relying the S.200 private complaint case, in which law is clearly settled that the accused has no right to appear or say any thing till due summons/notice is received by him after completion of pre-summon evidence is over and court satisfies with the genuineness of the complaint and takes cognizance and this quoted case has no relevance to the facts of your case.  You have to understand the nuances between s. 200 and S.340 of Cr.p.c.  Even a layman can say that S.200 complaint does not lie in the appellate court.

Now I quote Section 340 cr.p.c.