Bombay High Court Quashes Process in Criminal Complaint for Non-Compliance with Section 202 Cr.P.C. — Accused Residing Beyond Jurisdiction Requires Inquiry Before Issuance of Process

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: AURANGABAD In Favour of Accused
  • 172
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Motilal Khivraj Banthia, was an accused in RTC No.254 of 2010 pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kopargaon, District Ahmednagar, for offences punishable under Sections 405 and 409 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the Magistrate's order directing issuance of process against him. The primary contention was that the Magistrate failed to follow the procedure under Section 202 Cr.P.C. before issuing process under Section 204 Cr.P.C., as the petitioner was a resident of Panvel, which was beyond the Magistrate's jurisdiction. The court examined the mandatory requirement of Section 202 Cr.P.C., which stipulates that when the accused resides outside the territorial jurisdiction of the Magistrate, an inquiry or investigation must be conducted before issuing process. The court found that the Magistrate had not complied with this requirement, thereby vitiating the order. Consequently, the court quashed the order issuing process and remanded the matter back to the Magistrate for fresh consideration in accordance with law, directing that the inquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C. be conducted before any further process is issued.

Headnote

A) Criminal Procedure - Issuance of Process - Section 202 Cr.P.C. - Mandatory Inquiry - Where the accused resides beyond the jurisdiction of the Magistrate, the Magistrate must conduct an inquiry or direct investigation before issuing process under Section 204 Cr.P.C. - The court held that the Magistrate's failure to do so vitiates the order issuing process (Paras 3-5).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Magistrate was required to conduct an inquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C. before issuing process under Section 204 Cr.P.C. when the accused resided beyond the territorial jurisdiction of the court.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The order passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kopargaon, directing issuance of process against the petitioner is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Magistrate for fresh consideration in accordance with law, directing that the inquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C. be conducted before any further process is issued.

Law Points

  • Section 202 Cr.P.C. mandatory inquiry before issuing process when accused resides beyond jurisdiction
  • Section 204 Cr.P.C. issuance of process
  • Article 227 Constitution of India
  • Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2018 LawText (BOM) (08) 22

Criminal Writ Petition No.1565 of 2015

2018-08-02

Mangesh S. Patil

Mr. S.B. Kadu for Petitioner, Mr. B.V. Virdhe APP for Respondent State, Mr. S.S. Kulkarni for Respondent No.2

Motilal Khivraj Banthia

The State of Maharashtra & Mahendra Madanlal Bamb

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal writ petition challenging order of Magistrate issuing process against petitioner for offences under Sections 405 and 409 IPC.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought quashing of the order directing issuance of process against him.

Filing Reason

Magistrate failed to conduct inquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C. before issuing process, as petitioner resided beyond jurisdiction.

Previous Decisions

Magistrate passed order issuing process under Section 204 Cr.P.C. without complying with Section 202 Cr.P.C.

Issues

Whether the Magistrate was required to conduct an inquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C. before issuing process under Section 204 Cr.P.C. when the accused resided beyond the territorial jurisdiction of the court.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that since he was a resident of Panvel, beyond the Magistrate's jurisdiction, the Magistrate ought to have deferred the process and directed an inquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C. before issuing process. Petitioner relied on the Supreme Court decision in National Bank of Oman v. Barakara Abdul Aziz.

Ratio Decidendi

Section 202 Cr.P.C. mandates that when the accused resides outside the territorial jurisdiction of the Magistrate, an inquiry or investigation must be conducted before issuing process under Section 204 Cr.P.C. Failure to comply with this mandatory requirement vitiates the order issuing process.

Judgment Excerpts

Since the petitioner was shown to be a resident of Panvel in the title of the complaint, the Magistrate ought to have deferred the process and ought to have directed an inquiry since the petitioner was residing beyond the jurisdiction of the learned Magistrate.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the order of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kopargaon, directing issuance of process against him in RTC No.254 of 2010. The High Court heard the matter and passed judgment on 02.08.2018.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 202, 204, 482
  • Constitution of India: 227
  • Indian Penal Code, 1860: 405, 409
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Revision, Sets Aside Order Rejecting Discharge Application for Non-Compliance with Sections 226 and 227 Cr.P.C. — Mandatory Hearing Before Framing of Charge in Sessions Case
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Reviews Mandatory Three-Year Bar Practice Requirement for Civil Judge (Junior Division) Appointment. Court grants permission to file review petition and examines whether period for higher legal education should count toward practice req...