Skip to content


In Re: Velu Nattan - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1912)ILR35Mad606
AppellantIn Re: Velu Nattan
Cases ReferredEmpress v. Murphy I.L.R.
Excerpt:
criminal procedure code, section 203 - dismissal of complaint under section 203 without taking sworn statement of complainant. - .....it is argued that the presidency magistrate had no power to dismiss a complaint under section 203, criminal procedure code, without examining the complainant. it was held in queen-empress v. murphy i.l.r. (1887) all. 666 that a verification on oath of a complaint; before a magi strata, was a sufficient compliance with the provisions of section 203, and this has bean followed in criminal revision case no. 398 of 1908 on the file of this court with special reference to the procedure provided for presidency magistrates under section 200 (b). in the present ease the petitioner's vakil was present when the magistrate passed orders under section 203 criminal procedure code, dismissing the complaint and in the absence of any affidavit saying that he was precluded from showing cause against.....
Judgment:
ORDER

Spencer, J.

1. It is argued that the Presidency Magistrate had no power to dismiss a complaint under Section 203, Criminal Procedure Code, without examining the complainant. It was held in Queen-Empress v. Murphy I.L.R. (1887) All. 666 that a verification on oath of a complaint; before a Magi strata, was a sufficient compliance with the provisions of Section 203, and this has bean followed in Criminal Revision Case No. 398 of 1908 on the file of this Court with special reference to the procedure provided for Presidency Magistrates under Section 200 (b). In the present ease the petitioner's vakil was present when the Magistrate passed orders under Section 203 Criminal Procedure Code, dismissing the complaint and in the absence of any affidavit saying that he was precluded from showing cause against accepting the result of the police enquiry, I am not prepared to find that the complainant was in any way prejudiced by 'the Magistrate's procedure, assuming that the law required him to make a more detailed examination. At the most the omission to examine in this case amounts to no more than an irregularity of the description covered by Section 537, Criminal Procedure Code, The petition is dismissed.


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