Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2008 (4) TMI 441

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hat the complaint was filed against the accused for offence punishable under section 276C (2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. After complaint being filed, process was issued to the accused on January 29, 2001, and the accused also made his appearance on March 7, 2001. 3. The learned special public prosecutor submitted that on August 3, 2001, the learned Magistrate passed an order acquitting the accused erroneously invoking the provisions under section 256 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The offence under section 276C(2) is punishable for a maximum period of three years and as such, the procedure to be adopted is only warrant procedure as per Chapter XIX of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 4. The learned special public prosecutor submitted....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng a wrong provision of section 256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, grave prejudice is caused to the complainant and the administration of criminal justice is also affected. 6. The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that as per the records of the court, the complainant was absent on April 27, 2001, May 21, 2001, and on July 9, 2001. As the complainant was absent, the notice was ordered to be issued to the complainant for his appearance. But even on August 3, 2001, the complainant was absent. Only under the said circumstances, the learned Magistrate dismissed the complaint. 7. The learned counsel for the respondent further submitted that the case arises on the basis of the demand notice issued to the respondent. But the sa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... is only under Chapter XIX-B (cases instituted otherwise than on police report). As such, under Chapter XIX, section 249 of the Code of Criminal Procedure deals about the absence of the complainant which reads as follows : "249. Absence of complainant.-When the proceedings have been instituted upon complaint, and on any day fixed for the hearing of the case, the complainant is absent, and the offence may be lawfully compounded or is not a cognizable offence, the Magistrate may, in his discretion, notwithstanding anything hereinbefore contained, at any time before the charge has been framed, discharge the accused." 10. The order passed by the learned Magistrate under Chapter XX which is for trial of summons cases by Magistrate. Section....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hat of section 256 of the Criminal Procedure Code. 12. Apart from that, the effect that releasing the accused under section 249 of the Code of Criminal Procedure only amounts to discharging the accused wherein, it amounts to acquittal under Section 256 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Once the accused is acquitted under section 256 of the Criminal Procedure Code, second complaint is not maintainable but if a person is discharged under section 249 of the Criminal Procedure Code, second complaint is maintainable. 13. Section 300 of the Criminal Procedure Code is as follows : "300. Person once convicted or acquitted not to be tried for same offence.-(1) A person who has once been tried by a court of competent jurisdiction for an offenc....