Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether an application for discharge under Section 245(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 could be entertained before the complaint was taken on file and before cognizance, and whether the proceedings against the accused could be dropped at the 'check and call on' stage.
Analysis: Section 245(2) permits discharge only at a previous stage of the case. The expression 'previous stage' was understood as a stage after cognizance is taken and within the procedural sequence contemplated by Sections 200 to 204 and up to the completion of evidence under Section 244 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Where the complaint had merely been presented and adjourned at the 'check and call on' stage, without numbering, recording sworn statement, or any authoritative judicial notice of the allegations, cognizance had not yet been taken. In such a situation, the statutory power of discharge was not yet attracted.
Conclusion: The discharge application was premature and not maintainable at that stage. The order dropping the proceedings was liable to be set aside, and the complaint could proceed in accordance with law.
Ratio Decidendi: The power to discharge an accused under Section 245(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 arises only after cognizance has been taken and at a legally cognizable previous stage of the case, not before the complaint is taken on file.