Single judge disposed of criminal revision filed under Sections 397/401 Cr.P.C. modifying previous order to clarify that hearing accused is not mandatory during cognizance stage.
Application disposed of with observation that trial judge need not hear accused for cognizance.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 86
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1005 of 2021
Revisionist :- Shailesh Kumar Rai Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Prashant Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rahul Mishra,Rajeev Upadhyay,Shachi Kant Mishra
Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel for opposite party nos. 2 to 6 and learned A.G.A. appearing for State and perused the record.
This criminal revision under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. has been filed against the impugned order dated 06.01.2021 passed by learned Session Judge, Azamgarh in Criminal Revision No.289 of 2019 (Computer Revision No.UPAZ 010086622020(Ram Kishore and others Versus State of U.P.) arising out of Case Crime No.0135 of 2018, Police Station Kotwali, District Azamgarh whereby he has set aside the order dated 16.10.2019 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Azamgarh, directing the learned Magistrate to pass order in accordance with law after perusing the material on record and hearing both the parties.
Learned counsel for the revisionist has contended that it is settled preposition of law that while taking cognizance in the matter hearing of accused is not mandatory under any provisions of law.
Under the fact and circumstances of the case, the order dated 06.01.2021 passed by learned Session Judge, Azamgarh is modified to that effect.The trial judge is not bound to hear accused in the matter relating to taking of cognizance.
With the above observation, this application stands disposed of .
Order Date :- 2.9.2021 MN/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether hearing of accused is mandatory for the trial court while taking cognizance under Section 2(b)
2 provisions across 1 enactments
State Of U.P.
Umesh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
