Skip to content


In Re: Ishvarlal Maneklal Trivedi - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtMumbai
Decided On
Reported inAIR1926Bom225
AppellantIn Re: Ishvarlal Maneklal Trivedi
Excerpt:
- .....should not be passed against him. in reply, he stated as follows 'my pleader will give a written reply. i am not in a position, to give my reply now.' the learned magistrate thereupon proceeded to pass an order directing the complainant to pay rs. 25 as compensation. it has been contended for the applicant by mr. thakor that under section 250 as now amended the complainant had a right to an adjournment to enable him to consult a pleader and to give a written reply, if he chose. we cannot agree with this argument. on the contrary, the procedure prescribed under section 250 is similar to the procedure prescribed in the case of an accused person in a summons case to show cause under section 242. the magistrate dismissed the complaint and was of opinion that prima. facie it was.....
Judgment:

Fawcett, J.

1. The complaint of the applicant under Sections 827 and 448 of the Indian Penal Code was dismissed and as it was held by the Magistrate to be false and vexatious, he was called upon, under Section 250 of the Criminal Procedure Code, to show cause why an order of compensation should not be passed against him. In reply, he stated as follows 'My pleader will give a written reply. I am not in a position, to give my reply now.' The learned Magistrate thereupon proceeded to pass an order directing the complainant to pay Rs. 25 as compensation. It has been contended for the applicant by Mr. Thakor that under Section 250 as now amended the complainant had a right to an adjournment to enable him to consult a pleader and to give a written reply, if he chose. We cannot agree with this argument. On the contrary, the procedure prescribed under Section 250 is similar to the procedure prescribed in the case of an accused person in a summons case to show cause under Section 242. The Magistrate dismissed the complaint and was of opinion that prima. facie it was false and vexatious. As in regard to an original complaint, when the accused is called upon to show cause, he must, unless the Magistrate desires to adjourn the matter for special reasons, show cause immediately. The present was a simple case and no particular reason appears for the necessity of a written reply by a pleader. The order is, therefore, correct and we reject the application.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //