This revision petition sought to set aside an order framing a charge under Section 302 IPC. The High Court found the order devoid of reasoning, set it aside, and remanded the matter to the trial court for reconsideration.
The impugned order of 25.1.2019 is set aside; matter remanded to Trial Court for rehearing before 31.1.2020.
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.
$~48
Through Mr. Dharm Vir Singh, Adv.
versus
THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through Mr. Amit Chadha, APP
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR
found that except the three lines, just to complete the formalities that prima-facie case is made out against the petitioner, it contains nothing. It seems that the Trial Court has neither applied its mind nor has given any prima-facie reason to come to the conclusion as to how the charge under section 302 of the IPC is made out against the petitioner.
CHANDER SHEKHAR, J
DECEMBER 10, 2019/rk
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the impugned order on framing of charge is bereft of reasoning and should be set aside.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Rohit
The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)
Chander Shekhar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
