ABHIJIT PAWAR versus HEMANT MADHUKAR NIMBALKAR & ANR.

Section 202 CrPC mandates an inquiry or investigation before summoning an accused residing outside the Magistrate's jurisdiction; the summoning order failed to comply, requiring the process to be set aside and reconsidered. Application of mind regarding Press Act responsibilities is also required.

Parties: Appellant: Abhijit Pawar; Respondent: Hemant Madhukar Nimbalkar; Respondent: Pratap Rao Govind Rao Pawar
Jurisdiction: India
Judgment Date: 14 December 2016
Procedural Posture: Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Bombay High Court Decision
Outcome: Appeals allowed.
Legal Topics: Criminal Procedure, Defamation, Press and Registration of Books Act

Criminal Law Media Law Criminal Procedure Defamation Press and Registration of Books Act

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2

Parties

Abhijit Pawar

Appellant

Hemant Madhukar Nimbalkar

Respondent

Pratap Rao Govind Rao Pawar

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Bombay High Court Decision

Legal Issues

1 Whether compliance with Section 202 CrPC is mandatory when the accused resides outside the jurisdiction of the Magistrate
2 Vicarious liability for criminal defamation in relation to Press and Registration of Books Act

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed.

Orders

Notice dated 24th November, 2009 in respect of A-1 is quashed.
Magistrate directed to reconsider the matter afresh qua A-1 and A-2 after following proper inquiry as per Section 202 CrPC.