JOGENDRA NAHAK AND ORS. versus STATE OF ORISSA AND ORS.
Section 164(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code cannot be interpreted as empowering a Magistrate to record the statement of a person unsponsored by the investigating agency; statements of strangers to a criminal case cannot be recorded by Magistrates unless moved by the investigating agency.
- Parties
- Appellants: Jogendra Nahak and Others; Respondents: State of Orissa and Others
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 04 August 1999
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against High Court Order
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Recording of Statements Under Section 164 Cr PC, Role of Magistrate in Criminal Investigation, Writ Petitions in Criminal Process
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Jogendra Nahak and Others
Appellants
State of Orissa and Others
Respondents
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against High Court Order
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a Magistrate can record the statement of a person under Section 164 CrPC without being moved by the investigating agency
- 2 Scope and limitations of Section 164 CrPC regarding statements by witnesses unsponsored by police
Ratio Decidendi
Section 164(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code cannot be interpreted as empowering a Magistrate to record the statement of a person unsponsored by the investigating agency; statements of strangers to a criminal case cannot be recorded by Magistrates unless moved by the investigating agency.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Statements of appellants under Section 164 CrPC not to remain on record
- Appellants to pay Rs. 2,500 each as costs for filing frivolous and vexatious petition
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment