TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a Magistrate is bound to take cognizance of an offence under Section 190(1)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 immediately on the filing of a petition of complaint, or whether he may instead direct police investigation under Section 156(3) of that Code without first examining the complainant under Section 200.
Analysis: The Court held that the expression "taking cognizance" is not attracted merely because a complaint is filed before a Magistrate. Cognizance is taken when the Magistrate applies his mind to the complaint for the purpose of proceeding under the complaint procedure provided in the Code, namely examination of the complainant under Section 200 and the subsequent steps under Sections 202, 203 and 204. If the Magistrate applies his mind for another purpose, such as directing investigation under Section 156(3) or issuing a search warrant for the investigation, that does not amount to taking cognizance under Section 190(1)(a). The impugned view that the Chief Presidency Magistrate was bound to take cognizance immediately on filing of the complaint was therefore erroneous.
Conclusion: The Magistrate was not bound to take cognizance as soon as the complaint was filed, and the proceedings before the Chief Presidency Magistrate were valid.
Ratio Decidendi: A Magistrate takes cognizance under Section 190(1)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 only when he applies his mind to a complaint for the purpose of proceeding under the complaint procedure prescribed by the Code, and not when he merely directs police investigation or other ancillary steps.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
