2016 (9) TMI 1596

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . Under the provisions of Section 202(1) Code of Criminal Procedure it was, therefore, mandatory for the learned Magistrate to hold an inquiry either by himself or direct an investigation by the Police prior to the issuance of process. Admittedly, the same had not been done. If the aforesaid mandatory provisions of Section 202(1) Code of Criminal Procedure had not been followed, the learned trial .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... v. ORDER 1. Leave granted. 2. The High Court of Karnataka has dismissed the petitions for quashing of the criminal proceedings filed by the Appellants on the ground that this Court in Urmila Devi v. Yudhvir Singh [ (2013) 15 SCC 624] has laid down the law that an order summoning the Accused is revisable Under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and hence the proceedings .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... vestigation by the Police prior to the issuance of process. Admittedly, the same had not been done. If the aforesaid mandatory provisions of Section 202(1) Code of Criminal Procedure had not been followed, the learned trial Court would not have the jurisdiction to issue process/summons as has been done. 4. We have also taken note of the complaint petition and the averments made therein and the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X