Remanded

Gurdev Singh Chattha v. Chander Mohan Singhal and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC26 Nov 2008CRM-M/30945/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside a non-speaking order under Section 202 Cr.P.C. that remitted the matter to police without recorded reasons after the complainant concluded preliminary evidence. The court remitted the matter to be disposed of afresh.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 3.11.2008 set aside; matter remitted to the court below to pass orders afresh on the complaint without being influenced by this judgment's observations.

Gurdev Singh Chattha Vs Chander… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Punjab & Haryana HC (2008)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

Crl. Misc. No.30945-M of 2008. Date of Decision: 26.11.2008.

¶4

¶5

Gurdev Singh Chathha

¶6

.. Petitioner Vs.

¶7

Chander Mohan Singhal & Anr.

¶8

.. Respondents.

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR,

¶10

**Present:Mr. Ashit Malik, Advocate for the petitioner. *****

¶11

ARVIND KUMAR, J.

¶12

The petitioner-complainant is aggrieved with the order dated 3.11.2008 whereby the Court below instead of considering the preliminary evidence led by the complainant, postponed the issue of process against the respondents-accused and sent the complaint to the police for enquiry by means of Section 202 Cr.P.C.

¶13

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the paper-book carefully.

¶14

Wide discretionary power has been conferred to a Magistrate under Section 202(1) Cr.P.C. to postpone the issue of process and to either hold an inquiry himself or to direct an investigation to be made by the police officer as he thinks fit, for the purpose of deciding whether or not there is sufficient ground for proceeding and when a Statute gives wide discretionary power to an authority or Court to adopt any one of the procedures prescribed under law, it becomes mandatory for the said authority to record reasons for exercising the power even if the statute does not expressly enjoin upon the said authority to do so. In the instant case, as is emerges out from the tenor of impugned order, no reasons have been given by the Court below impressing upon it to forward the complaint to the police for enquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C. , especially when the

¶15

¶16

complainant had already concluded his preliminary evidence. The order is not only a non-speaking but cryptic one and cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 3.11.2008 is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the court below with a direction that it shall pass orders afresh in the complaint and without being influenced from any observation made hereinabove.

¶17

Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶18

(ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE

¶19

November 26,2008 Jiten

Gurdev Singh Chattha v. Chander Mohan Singhal and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurdev Singh Chattha v. Chander Mohan Singhal and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jee Ram Vs State of Haryana and Anr.

State of Haryana and Ors. Vs Daya Ram

M/S Brar Kheti Sewa Centre Vs State of Punjab

Ram Lal and Others Vs M/S Paul Merchants Limited

Raju Vs State of Haryana and Another

Sandeep Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.