Court justice and delay, manish mohan

3/1
Administration of criminal justice system
5 pillars court police prosecution defence prison

Relation between procedural and substantive..subservant

Strict interpretation
..
Crpc is not penal statute but to enforce penal statute

Hitendrathakur v state of Maharashtra 1994 (N)

Retrospective application of procedural law
Para 26

5 principles

4/1
Fatima bibi v ahmed patel

(N)

[also central bank v ram Narayan]

Section 2, 3, 4 IPC extra territorial jurisdiction

188 crpc offence committed outside india

5/1

1898 imp

1923, 1955 amendments

14th law commission report of 1958

prior sanction of central

government

25th of 1963
32, 33, 36, 37 lcr
40, 41 repeal of 1898 with 1973

Chapter 18 cpc
Section 162 crpc

306, 307 24 iea

Chapter 23 crpc wrt evidence

-

Evidence act is not exhaustive

Section 4 crpc otherwise dealt with other mentioned in crpc

It is a general procedure
Overrides other statutes

4(1) offences under ipc will be dealt with crpc

4(2) for other than ipc, special law if there

433A maru ram v uoi

conflict between state and union

Section 5 Conflict between

-----------------------------------

general

and

specific

law

of

procedure

Abdul karim v state of Karnataka public prosecutor withdrawal of case

Section 6-23 ------------------------------------

6/1
Hierarchy of criminal court.

Definition of court of justice section 20 IPC, section 3 IEA

SC

HC

Court of sessions

Judicial Magistrate I

Judicial Magistrate II

Executive magistrate

Court of sessions
Principle sessions court > addtl sessions court > assistant sessions
judge
Power of Principal Sessions judge = power of addtl sessions
judge

Non metro
CJM addtl CJM > JM I > JM II

metro
CMM >

Supreme Court
Constitution 124 129 130 132 134 (136-139) 141 144 145
Crpc 406

Supreme Court Enlargement of criminal appellate jurisdiction act, 1974

Judicial impact assessment

7/1

8/1

Section 28

29

Difference between punishment and sentencingone is prescribed by

the law (substantive) and other is given depending on circumstances of the
case (procedural).

Separation of power .executive magistrate

Section 20-23

exe mag

appointment, powers

Preventive and precautionary measures:

Section 39, 44 (power to arrest), 94, 97, 98,
107-124, 129132, 133-143 (public nuisance), 144, 145-148(disputes related to
immovable properties),
Other 174, 175, 176
144, 145 law & order]

411, 412

[104, 109-110,129, 130, 133,

10/1
107-124, 129-132, 133-143 (public nuisance), 144, 145-148(disputes related
to immovable properties), 149-153
- Preventive and precautionary
measures:

107 Security for keeping peace

108 Security (i) intention (ii) not necessary strict liability

109

Committee for protection of democratic rights v state of west Bengal, 2010 cbi investigation para 45

11/1
Role of magistrate in investigation
Sakiri vasu v state of UP, 2008

- magistrate can

- uoi v Prakash hinduja, 2003

12

- magistrate cant

Manubhai riddhilal patel usha ben v state of Gujarat, 2013 crlj

rishpat v state of delhi section 2(h) investigation

-entire
p 11,

hn

People union for civil liberties v state of Maharashtra, 2014 16 guidelines

for encounter

12/1
Section 2 cognizable

MP sharma v Satish Chandra

State of Bombay v kathi kalu

2(d) complaint

to magistrate

How to connect it with 200 & 202

13/1
Investigation

Hinduja, Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P, Kathi Kalu Ogad, Manubhai Ratilal Patel,
Prakash P. Hinduja, State of West Bengal v. Committee for Protection of
Democratic Rights

Hardeep Singh,

Procedure under Section 107-110

1. When the executive magistrate (RDO) gets information from a police

report or otherwise, regarding the possibility of doing such acts by a person
which would result in breach of peace or of committing an offence for which
magistrate can demand security for good behaviour, he may decide to
proceed under Section 107-110 of the Code.

2. If he decides to proceed under Section 107-110, he shall first issue a

written order calling upon a person to show cause why he should not be
ordered to execute a bond with or without sureties for keeping peace or good
behaviour.

3. The preliminary order shall contain the

a) the substance of the information
b) amount of the bond to be executed
c) the term for which such bond should remain in force
d) the number, character, and class of security required.

4. The contents of the Preliminary Order should be read over to the person, if
he is present in the court.

5. If such person is not present in the court, a summons fixing the date on
which he should appear. A copy of the preliminary order must accompany
every summons.

6. The person against whom a summons and P.O. is issued has to appear
before the executive magistrate on the date fixed for his appearance.

7. The person against who the proceedings are initiated is entitled to take
bail. During the period of inquiry, the person against the whom proceedings
are initiated will be allowed to be at large if he takes bail. Otherwise, if he
fails to take bail he will be remanded to sub-jail.

8. The inquiry is to be conducted by following the rules prescribed for trial of

summons case.

9. The police should adduce evidence to prove that the person against whom
proceedings has been started. He can also give evidence to disprove the
allegations.

10. At the end of the inquiry, the magistrate finds that it is necessary to
demand security for keeping peace or good behavior, the person concerned
will be directed to execute a bond with or without sureties. And if the
magistrate finds that there is no need to demand security, he shall discharge
the person
11. the person against whom proceedings are initiated is entitled to take bail
12. Failure of the bond will result in jail for remainder of the period
Appeal under section 373

17/1

Section 110
Gopalan acharay v
-----------------------------

state

of

Kerala

AIR

1981

SC

674

Premchand v union of India AIR 1981 SC 613 -----------------------------------Habitual offender, habit, bad character
Corresponding IPC sections

18/1
..
Maintenance of public peace and tranquality
Ulawful asselmbly 141

Christian community welfare authority v state of maharashtra

19/1

B. Public Nuisance
Section 133 conditional order to remove public nuisance,
immediate

142 for

Ex manjha by delhi govt

Naga people human rights movement v union of india 1997

133 & 134-143

Ratlam municipality v vardhy chand 1980 -------------------------------para
on pg 12

6 circumstances for conditional order

Making order absolute - 136
Service of summons 62 - 68

137(2) & (3) reliable evidence? Intention? denial of a public right

20/1
<JHYVJHBJVB,JFV>

21/1
144
Gulam abbass v state of UP --not necessary-Madhulima A
Babulal parathe

Instrumental theory (aimed toward securing/promoting values such as

democracy)
Market place idea
Speech promoting demo
Watchdog theory
Freedom promoting truth
Intrinsic value theory (where speech is valued in itself)

Lawrence liang