Skip to content


Lalit Mohan Mondal and ors. Vs. Benoyendra Nath Chatterjee - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Case NumberCriminal Appeal No. 408 of 1981
Judge
Reported inAIR1982SC785; 1982CriLJ625; (1982)3SCC219
ActsCode of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 341, 397(2) and 482
AppellantLalit Mohan Mondal and ors.
RespondentBenoyendra Nath Chatterjee
Excerpt:
- indian penal code, 1890 sections 300,149 & 307: [dr. arijit pasayat & asok kumar ganguly,jj] murder -unlawful assembly -common object -incident taking place out of election rivalry -accused had set up his candidate - on polling day accused initially dissuading voters from voting for rival candidate - subsequently resorting to rowdism to disturb poll - on being asked by deceased not to do so accused exhorting other accused to teach him lesson - accused taking out hidden pistol and firing at deceased causing fatal injury - other accused not assaulting deceased but causing simple injuries to others - other accused never knew that accused was armed held, common object of assembly was not to commit murder. conviction of accused alone for murder is proper. alteration of conviction of other..........the bar contained in section 341 of the code. in the instant case, the high court has merely indicated that this is not a fit case for invoking the inherent power without at all applying its mind whether or not in the circumstances, it was a fit case for filing a complaint, particularly when the matter rested merely on oath against oath.2. for this reason, therefore, we allow this appeal and remit the case to the high court to send for the records and satisfy itself whether the order directing complaint to be filed is expedient in the interest of justice, so as to attract its inherent jurisdiction under section 482 of the code. meanwhile, further proceedings will be stayed.
Judgment:

S. Murtaza Fazal Ali, J.

1. We have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the judgment of the High Court. We agree with the High Court that against an order passed in appeal under Section 341 of the Criminal P.C, the order would not be revisable by the High Court under Section 397(2) of the Criminal P.C. , but there can be no doubt that the Court is entitled to examine the matter under Section 482 of the Criminal P.C. which expressly overrules the bar contained in Section 341 of the Code. In the instant case, the High Court has merely indicated that this is not a fit case for invoking the inherent power without at all applying its mind whether or not in the circumstances, it was a fit case for filing a complaint, particularly when the matter rested merely on oath against oath.

2. For this reason, therefore, we allow this appeal and remit the case to the High Court to send for the records and satisfy itself whether the order directing complaint to be filed is expedient in the interest of justice, so as to attract its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code. Meanwhile, further proceedings will be stayed.


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