[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Anticipatory bail granted to a person is applicable only in respect of the offence for which it was granted by the court. If another offence was registered against that person in the past, or if another offence is registered against him in future, then the benefit of anticipatory bail will not automatically extend to such other offence(s).

The person concerned has to apply afresh for anticipatory bail in such other offence(s) as well, and get separate order for grant of anticipatory bail from the competent court under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

In Section 2(a) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, “aggrieved person” is defined widely as under”

““aggrieved person” means any woman who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the respondent and who alleges to have been subjected to any act of domestic violence by the respondent;”

So, any woman can be an aggrieved person.

But, Section 2(q) defined “respondent” in a narrow way, by referring only to “adult male” as shown below:

““respondent” means any adult male person who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the aggrieved person and against whom the aggrieved person has sought any relief under this Act:

Provided that an aggrieved wife or female living in a relationship in the nature of marriage may also file a complaint against the relative of the husband or the male partner;”

However, in the recent case of Hiral P. Harsora v. Kusum Narottamdas Harsora, (2016) 10 SCC 165 : 2017 Cri LJ 509 : AIR 2016 SC 4774, the Supreme Court held that:

“We, therefore, set aside the impugned judgment of the Bombay High Court and declare that the words “adult male” in Section 2(q) of the 2005 Act will stand deleted since these words do not square with Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Consequently, the proviso to Section 2(q), being rendered otiose, also stands deleted.”

In view of this judgment of the Supreme Court, it is now clear that a mother in law can file a case of domestic violence against her daughter in law under the provisions of the above Act, if other ingredients are satisfied, because now the respondent can also be a woman.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

You have not specified whether the city to which you want to get the case transferred is in the same district (where the trial is presently going on), or outside the district but in the same state, or outside the state. Depending on this, the application for transfer of case may have to be filed in the Sessions Court, or in the High Court, or in the Supreme Court, respectively.

The legal provisions for transfer of a criminal case are contained in Sections 406, 407 and 408 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

• File the transfer application in the Sessions Court under Section 408 Cr.P.C. if the transfer of case is within the same district.

• File the transfer application in the High Court under Section 407 Cr.P.C. if the transfer of case is outside the district but within the same state.

• File the transfer application in the Supreme Court under Section 406 Cr.P.C. if the transfer of case is outside the state.

Transfer of the case is within the discretion of the court concerned to which such transfer application is filed and is not guaranteed. You will have to convince the court about the need to transfer the case. Read the provisions of the relevant section (as mentioned above) to get an idea about the grounds on which the transfer can be made.

These sections are reproduced below for your information:

“406. Power of Supreme Court to transfer cases and appeals.— (1) Whenever it is made to appear to the Supreme Court that an order under this section is expedient for the ends of justice, it may direct that any particular case or appeal be transferred from one High Court to another High Court or from a Criminal Court subordinate to one High Court to another Criminal Court of equal or superior jurisdiction subordinate to another High Court.

(2) The Supreme Court may act under this section only on the application of the Attorney-General of India or of a party interested, and every such application shall be made by motion, which shall, except when the applicant is the Attorney-General of India or the Advocate-General of the State, be supported by affidavit or affirmation.

(3) Where any application for the exercise of the powers conferred by this section is dismissed, the Supreme Court may, if it is of opinion that the application was frivolous or vexatious, order the applicant to pay by way of compensation to any person who has opposed the application such sum not exceeding one thousand rupees as it may consider appropriate in the circumstances of the case.”

 

“407. Power of High Court to transfer cases and appeals.— (1) Whenever it is made to appear to the High Court—

(a) that a fair and impartial inquiry or trial cannot be had in any Criminal Court subordinate thereto, or

(b) that some question of law of unusual difficulty is likely to arise, or

(c) that an order under this section is required by any provision of this Code, or will tend to the general convenience of the parties or witnesses, or is expedient for the ends of justice,

it may order—

(i) that any offence be inquired into or tried by any Court not qualified under Sections 177 to 185 (both inclusive), but in other respects competent to inquire into or try such offence;

(ii) that any particular case or appeal, or class of cases or appeals, be transferred from a Criminal Court subordinate to its authority to any other such Criminal Court of equal or superior jurisdiction;

(iii) that any particular case be committed for trial to a Court of Session; or

(iv) that any particular case or appeal be transferred to and tried before itself.

(2) The High Court may act either on the report of the lower Court, or on the application of a party interested, or on its own initiative:

Provided that no application shall lie to the High Court for transferring a case from one Criminal Court to another Criminal Court in the same sessions division, unless an application for such transfer has been made to the Sessions Judge and rejected by him.

(3) Every application for an order under sub-section (1) shall be made by motion, which shall, except when the applicant is the Advocate-General of the State, be supported by affidavit or affirmation.

(4) When such application is made by an accused person, the High Court may direct him to execute a bond, with or without sureties, for the payment of any compensation which the High Court may award under sub-section (7).

(5) Every accused person making such application shall give to the Public Prosecutor notice in writing of the application, together with a copy of the grounds on which it is made; and no order shall be made on the merits of the application unless at least twenty-four hours have elapsed between the giving of such notice and the hearing of the application.

(6) Where the application is for the transfer of a case or appeal from any subordinate Court, the High Court may, if it is satisfied that it is necessary so to do in the interests of justice, order that, pending the disposal of the application, the proceedings in the subordinate Court shall be stayed, on such terms as the High Court may think fit to impose:

Provided that such stay shall not affect the subordinate Court’s power of remand under Section 309.

(7) Where an application for an order under sub-section (1) is dismissed, the High Court may, if it is of opinion that the application was frivolous or vexatious, order the applicant to pay by way of compensation to any person who has opposed the application such sum not exceeding one thousand rupees as it may consider proper in the circumstances of the case.

(8) When the High Court orders under sub-section (1) that a case be transferred from any Court for trial before itself, it shall observe in such trial the same procedure which that Court would have observed if the case had not been so transferred.

(9) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to affect any order of Government under Section 197.”

 

“408. Power of Sessions Judge to transfer cases and appeals.— (1) Whenever it is made to appear to a Sessions Judge that an order under this sub-section is expedient for the ends of justice, he may order that any particular case be transferred from one Criminal Court to another Criminal Court in his sessions division.

(2) The Sessions Judge may act either on the report of the lower Court, or on the application of a party interested, or on his own initiative.

(3) The provisions of sub-sections (3), (4), (5), (6), (7) and (9) of Section 407 shall apply in relation to an application to the Sessions Judge for an order under sub-section (1) as they apply in relation to an application to the High Court for an order under sub-section (1) of Section 407, except that sub-section (7) of that section shall so apply as if for the words “one thousand rupees” occurring therein, the words “two hundred and fifty rupees” were substituted.”

 

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Usually, the guidelines / instructions of the Department of Personnel & Training (DoPT) are applicable in the case of autonomous organisations of the Central Government. However, if your organisation does not follow the DoPT guidelines, then you’ll have to find out the relevant guidelines which are applicable to you.

Even otherwise, if your organisation is informing you that an employee cannot apply for a lower job, then you can ask your organisation to tell you about the relevant guidelines on the basis of which they are saying so.

In any case, the consolidated guidelines of the DoPT [No.28011/1/2013-Estt(C) Dated 5December, 2013 of the Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions (Department of Personnel & Training)] on application through proper channel for another post are available at this link. You can go through these guidelines. It is mentioned therein that these guidelines are applicable to autonomous bodies too. There does not appear to be any restriction for applying for a lower post in these guidelines; but you can confirm from your organisation.

All other DoPT circulars can also be searched at this link by searching the relevant subject or providing other details.

Moreover, if you willing to resign and forego the benefits of the existing post (as you have said), then it should not be a big issue because you can resign first and then apply (though in this case, you’ll have some risk factor if you are not selected in that lower post).

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Firstly, please note that if both parties are willing to compromise, then the civil case can be decided by the civil court itself on the basis of such compromise or settlement between the parties. There is no need to go to the Lok Adalat for this purpose. It is provided under Order 23 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Code, which is reproduced below:

“3. Compromise of suit.— Where it is proved to the satisfaction of the Court that a suit has been adjusted wholly or in part by any lawful agreement or compromise, in writing and signed by the parties or where the defendant satisfies the plaintiff in respect of the whole or any part of the subject-matter of the suit, the Court shall order such agreement, compromise or satisfaction to be recorded, and shall pass a decree in accordance therewith so far as it relates to the parties to the suit, whether or not the subject-matter of the agreement, compromise or satisfaction is the same as the subject-matter of the suit:

Provided that where it is alleged by one party and denied by the other that an adjustment or satisfaction has been arrived at, the Court shall decide the question; but no adjournment shall be granted for the purpose of deciding the question, unless the Court, for reasons to be recorded, thinks fit to grant such adjournment.

Explanation.— An agreement or compromise which is void or voidable under the Indian Contract Act, 1872 (9 of 1872), shall not be deemed to be lawful within the meaning of this rule.”

Secondly, presuming that you still want to go to Lok Adalat for settlement of the issue between the two parties, again, the civil court itself has the power to refer the case to Lok Adalat and there is no need to withdraw the case and then file the case afresh in Lok Adalat. This is possible under Section 89 of the CPC, which empowers the civil court to refer the case to Lok Adalat. This section is as under:

“89. Settlement of disputes outside the Court.— (1) Where it appears to the court that there exist elements of a settlement which may be acceptable to the parties, the Court shall formulate the terms of settlement and give them to the parties for their observations and after receiving the observations of the parties, the court may reformulate the terms of a possible settlement and refer the same for—

(a) arbitration;

(b) conciliation;

(c) judicial settlement including settlement through Lok Adalat; or

(d) mediation.

(2) Where a dispute has been referred—

(a) for arbitration or conciliation, the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996) shall apply as if the proceedings for arbitration or conciliation were referred for settlement under the provisions of that Act;

(b) to Lok Adalat, the Court shall refer the same to the Lok Adalat in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 20 of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 (39 of 1987) and all other provisions of that Act shall apply in respect of the dispute so referred to the Lok Adalat;

(c) for judicial settlement, the Court shall refer the same to a suitable institution or person and such institution or person shall be deemed to be a Lok Adalat and all the provisions of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 (39 of 1987) shall apply as if the dispute were referred to a Lok Adalat under the provisions of that Act;

(d) for mediation, the Court shall effect a compromise between the parties and shall follow such procedure as may be prescribed.”

Thirdly, if you are still keen to withdraw the case from the civil court and then approach the Lok Adalat, then you can do so under Order 23 Rule 1 of the CPC which allows the plaintiff to withdraw the suit with liberty to institute a fresh suit.

Now, to answer the other part of your question, relating to not involving the lawyer in this whole exercise, if you have engaged a lawyer for your civil case, then naturally he would be involved in whatever action you take in that civil case. However, you can cancel the Vakalatnama of the lawyer and discharge him from the civil case if you don’t want to involve him in such compromise / settlement. In that situation, he would no more be your lawyer in that case.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act defines the offence of cheque dishonour. There are many necessary ingredients of this offence (read my article for more details on this), which must be satisfied for conviction for this offence. If any of the necessary ingredients is not satisfied, then the accused cannot be convicted and it may lead to his acquittal.

Therefore, mere acquittal of the accused in a Section 138 N.I. Act does not mean that the civil liability of the drawer of the cheque has been satisfied or that such liability did not exist in the first place. In view of this, generally speaking, it may be possible to successfully pursue a summary suit (under the Civil Procedure Code) for recovery of the amount due from the drawer of the cheque even after a cheque bounce case under Section 138 has ended in acquittal.

However, in one particular situation, if the acquittal of the accused in Section 138 case was on the ground that there was no debt or liability of the drawer of the cheque, then it may create difficulty in the summary suit for recovery of money because such a finding may strike at the root of the summary suit. Naturally, if is proved on the basis of evidence that there was no debt or liability, then recovery of money in summary suit may not succeed.

But, if the acquittal in Section 138 case is on other grounds, or on the benefit of doubt (even on the question of debt or liability), then it may still be possible to pursue the summary suit for recovery of money, though the result would depend on the facts of each individual case.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Provisions relating to payment of subsistence allowance for suspended employee of Haryana Government are contained mainly in Rule 83 and Rule 84 (and a few other rules) of the Haryana Civil Services (General) Rules, 2016. These rules are reproduced at the end of this answer for your convenience.

As per Rule 84, after 6 months of the suspension, the amount of subsistence allowance may be increased up to 75% of pay, if, in the opinion of the authority, the period of suspension has been prolonged not directly attributable to the Government employee, and these reasons have to be recorded in writing. However, if the authority considers that the period of suspension has been prolonged due to reasons that can be attributed to the employee, then after 6 months, the subsistence allowance can even be reduced up to 25% of pay.

In your case, as you have completed 6 months of suspension, your subsistence allowance should generally be increased up to 75% of pay, if you were not responsible for delay in suspension period, i.e., for your suspension period getting prolonged.

The above-referred rules are as under:

“83. Subsistence allowance during the period of first six months.— A Government employee under suspension is entitled to subsistence allowance at an amount equal to the leave salary which he would have drawn had he been on leave on half pay.

Note.― The subsistence allowance shall not be denied on any grounds unless the Government employee under suspension does not furnish the certificate that he is not engaged in any other employment, business, profession or vocation during the period of suspension.

“84. Review of subsistence allowance after every six months.— Where the period of suspension exceeds six months, the authority which made or is deemed to have made the order of suspension shall be competent to vary the amount of subsistence allowance for the period after every six months as follows:-

(i) the amount of subsistence allowance may be increased by a suitable amount not exceeding fifty per cent of the subsistence allowance admissible during the period of the first six months, if, in the opinion of the said authority, the period of suspension has been prolonged for reasons to be recorded in writing, not directly attributable to the Government employee; or

(ii) the amount of subsistence allowance may be reduced by a suitable amount, not exceeding fifty per cent of the subsistence allowance admissible during the period of the first six months, if, in the opinion of the said authority, the period of suspension has been prolonged due to reasons to be recorded in writing, directly attributable to the Government employee.

Note 1.─ The initial grant of subsistence allowance shall be payable at an amount equal to leave salary on half pay leave. In the event of any alteration in subsistence allowance under clause (i) or (ii) of this rule, the increase or decrease shall be calculated on the amount of subsistence allowance initially fixed and shall not be subject to any maximum limit.

Note 2.─ It is obligatory under this rule in sufficient time before the expiry of the six months of suspension the competent authority shall review each case in which the period of suspension is likely to exceed six months and even if it comes to the conclusion that the rate is not to be altered having regard to all the circumstances of the case. Specific orders to that effect are to be passed placing on record the circumstances under which the decision had to be taken. Such review shall be made at least on every six months and specific orders are to be passed for increasing or decreasing or not altering of the subsistence allowance.”

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Your question is not clear. But, if your question refers to the fact that the Judicial Magistrate did not follow provisions of law (such as those mentioned by you) and passed an order in your case without following those legal provisions, then your remedy would be to file a revision petition in Sessions Court, or appeal (if applicable) or a Section 482 Cr.P.C. in the high court. The nature of such remedy (i.e., whether revision, or appeal or Section 482 Cr.P.C. petition) would depend on the nature of order passed by the Magistrate.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

By its very nature, the transfer of a case can be ordered during the pendency of that case in a court. Therefore, the transfer petition can be filed for getting a case transferred to another court at any time during which this case is pending in a court. There is no specific limitation period for the transfer petition. However, it is advisable to file the transfer petition at the earliest possible stage of the case, even though there is no specific limitation period.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Section 30 of the Arms Act, 1959, is reproduced below:

“30. Punishment for contravention of licence or rule.—Whoever contravenes any condition of a licence or any provision of this Act or any rule made thereunder, for which no punishment is provided elsewhere in this Act, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to two thousand rupees, or with both.”

Thus, the maximum punishment for the offence under this section is imprisonment for 6 months. Therefore, in view of the provisions of the First Schedule to the Criminal Procedure Code, this offence would be bailable.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

The court fee for filing a private complaint in court is generally minimal, though it differs from state to state. For example, the court fee for filing a private complaint case in the Metropolitan Magistrate court in Delhi is only about ₹ 1.25 (one rupee and twenty-five paise).

If you are engaging an advocate for the purpose of filing (and arguing) your private criminal complaint, then of course, such advocate may charge his professional fee, which may differ from advocate to advocate.

But, if you are filing the private complaint yourself, in person, without engaging any advocate, then there would not be any other legal expenses for filing the private complaint in the court.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Provision for grant of anticipatory bail is contained in Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The relevant extract from this section is: “Where any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence, he may apply to the High Court or the Court of Session for a direction under this section that in the event of such arrest he shall be released on bail”.

It should thus be clear from this legal provision that an application for grant of anticipatory bail can be filed only if that person has “reason to believe that he may be arrested”, i.e., he should have apprehension of an arrest. In fact, the apprehension of arrest should also be in respect of a specific non-bailable offence. If the person is not apprehending arrest, he cannot apply for anticipatory bail, because in that situation it would become a blanket order of no arrest, which is not permissible.

The second part of your question is whether the anticipatory bail application can be moved without the presence of the applicant (i.e., the person who seeks anticipatory bail). This question is answered in sub-section 1-B of Section 438 of Cr.P.C. which is as under:

“(1-B) The presence of the applicant seeking anticipatory bail shall be obligatory at the time of final hearing of the application and passing of final order by the Court, if on an application made to it by the Public Prosecutor, the Court considers such presence necessary in the interest of justice.”

Therefore, the presence of the applicant is necessary at the time of the final hearing of the application for grant of anticipatory bail and passing of the final order, if the court considers it necessary on an application made to it by the public prosecutor. Otherwise, generally speaking, the presence of the applicant may not be necessary at the time of making the application for grant of anticipatory bail, but the court can insist for the presence of the applicant.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

In my considered view, in the facts mentioned by you, your case is covered under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. You had made payment of a fee for availing some service, and that too from a government enterprise (i.e., a government company).

In this regard, I may point out that in the case of Dr. Chandrakant Vitthal Sawant v. L.R. Pilankar Inspector of Land Records, 2013 SCC OnLine NCDRC 642 : [2013] NCDRC 632 : (2013) 3 CPJ 532 (NC) : (2013) 3 CPR 329 (NC), which was decided by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) on 23 July 2013, it was held as under:

“So far as the issue regarding the claim of the respondents discharging sovereign function as government servants is concerned, we do not agree with the view taken by the District Forum while rejecting the complaint. No doubt both the respondents are government servants and were carrying out their functions in their official capacity. However, carrying out of measurement of land for payment of prescribed fees as per the application made by the petitioner before the respondents cannot be regarded as a sovereign function. This is part of their administrative functions which they were required to perform for a prescribed fee. This function, therefore, cannot be called a ‘sovereign function’. This view is in line with the judgment of this Commission dated 08.07.2002 in the case of Shri Prabhakar Vyankoba Aadone v. Superintendent Civil Court [R.P. No. 2135 of 2000/1986-2004 Consumer 7211 (NS)] on which reliance has been placed by the petitioner. It was held in this case that while judicial officers may be protected from being arrayed in legal proceedings for their judicial function, they do not enjoy immunity for the administrative functions performed by them or by their staff and as such the grant of certified copies of orders of courts is not a sovereign function but is an administrative function. It was also held that since this is not a judicial function, it does not partake the character of a ‘sovereign function’. It was also held by this Commission in that case that an applicant for certified copy of a judicial order, who deposits a fee for obtaining such copy is a “Consumer” within the meaning of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and the processing of such application and the preparation and delivery of the copy in consideration of the copying charges/fee by the concerned staff attached to the court would be a service within the meaning of the Act. We find that the ratio of this case is squarely applicable to the present case where the petitioner had approached the respondent authority for carrying the measurement of the land in question and for which purpose the applicant had paid the requisite fees to the respondents. In this circumstances, the petitioner is a consumer within the meaning of the Consumer Protection Act qua the functions discharged by the respondents since these functions of the respondents while dealing with the application of the petitioner for measurement of the land would constitute service.”

Thus, as per this judgment of NCDRC, you are a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act for the facts mentioned by you, since the service was to be given to you on the basis of a payment and it was not a sovereign function of the respondent department / enterprise. This is what is my considered opinion. You can also read a news report in respect of the aforesaid case decided by the NCDRC at this link.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

If statements of some witnesses have been recorded falsely by the police, then during the trial, these witnesses can state like that and they can disown their statements. They can deny their police statements in the court.

Irrespective of what is recorded by police during investigation under Section 161/162 of the Criminal Procedure Code, it is the statement of the witness recorded by the court inside the court that matters. Statement recorded by police can only be used for the purpose of contradiction, it cannot be used as a substantive statement.

In such situation, sometimes, people also try to get the sworn affidavits of the witnesses prepared (before trial) denying their statements recorded by police, and then apply for discharge. But, usually, the court may not consider these affidavits during the discharge stage, and ask the accused to give his defence at the trial stage. At the stage of discharge application or the framing of charge, what is seen is whether there is a prima facie case, and at that stage, usually, the defence documents /statements are not considered. However, if you still want to try it, you can try that, though the chances of success would be very less at the discharge stage. At the time of trial, of course, these witnesses can deny their statements having been recorded by police and that can help you, if you are the accused person.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Yes, the law requires that non-cognizable offence should be clubbed together with the cognizable offence, wherever these offences have occurred together.

Section 155(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code clearly lays down that: “Where a case relates to two or more offences of which at least one is cognizable, the case shall be deemed to be a cognizable case, notwithstanding that the other offences are non-cognizable.”

Thus, there is no need to give a separate report in respect of non-cognizable offences if they have occurred along with the cognizable offence. Only one FIR needs to be given for these offences.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Author]

Posts