9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (7) TMI 685X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gned the order dated 25-6-1990, passed by the J.M.F.C. Nasik issuing against him process under sections 452, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. in Criminal Case No. 258 of 1989, arising out of a complaint tiled by the respondent No. 1. 2. Facts in brief leading to the present petition are as under :--- On 16-8-1989, the complainant- respondent No. 1 filed a complaint against the petitioner in the Court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of the order dated 13-2-1990, statement of the complainant, was recorded by the J.M.F.C. who, thereafter, as mentioned in para 1 issued process under sections 452, 323, 504 and 506 of I.P.C. against the petitioner. It is this order which is taken offence to by the petitioner and assailed by him, through the present petition. 3. I have heard Mr. Sudhir Hardikar for the petitioner and Mr. R. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ged that once the police report was received, there was no question of the complainant being examined again. 4. I have reflected over the said submission of Mr. Hardikar and find merit in it. A perusal of the provisions contained in section 200 Cr.P.C. would show that alter a complaint has been filed, statement of the complainant and that of the witnesses, if present, shall be recorded. A perus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o be recorded prior to a police investigation and not subsequent to it. In the instant case, not only was the statement of the complainant recorded under section 200 Cr.P.C. prior to police investigation, but it was also recorded under section 202 Cr.P.C. after police investigation. As the complainant had already been examined under section 200 Cr.P.C., in my view, it was not permissible for the J ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
