ROSY AND ANR. versus STATE OF KERALA AND ORS.

ROSY AND ANR. versus STATE OF KERALA AND ORS.

The proviso to Section 202(2) Cr.P.C., though it imposes a duty on the Magistrate to examine all witnesses in cases triable exclusively by Sessions, omission to do so does not by itself vitiate subsequent trial unless objection is raised at an appropriate stage and prejudice to the accused is established; since the objection was only raised at the stage of arguments after completion of most of the trial, the High Court erred in directing a fresh inquiry, and the Sessions Court should complete the hearing and dispose of the case on merits.

Parties
Appellant: Rosy; Respondent: State of Kerala
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
10 January 2000
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Order of High Court Directing Magistrate to Conduct Fresh Enquiry Under Section 202(2) Cr.p.c.
Outcome
Appeal allowed; order of the High Court set aside.
Legal Topics
Committal Proceedings, Section 202(2) Cr.p.c. Proviso, Sessions Trial, Irregularity in Procedure, Prejudice to Accused, Interpretation of Statutes
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Committal Proceedings Section 202(2) Cr.p.c. Proviso Sessions Trial Irregularity in Procedure Prejudice to Accused Interpretation of Statutes

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 4 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rosy

Appellant

State of Kerala

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Order of High Court Directing Magistrate to Conduct Fresh Enquiry Under Section 202(2) Cr.p.c.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proviso to Section 202(2) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, regarding examination of witnesses by Magistrate in cases triable exclusively by Sessions Court is mandatory or directory and if omission vitiates proceedings.
  2. 2 Whether non-examination of witnesses in committal court can be raised at the stage of final arguments after completion of prosecution evidence.
  3. 3 Whether failure to comply with proviso to Section 202(2) Cr.P.C. caused prejudice to the accused and vitiated the trial.

Ratio Decidendi

The proviso to Section 202(2) Cr.P.C., though it imposes a duty on the Magistrate to examine all witnesses in cases triable exclusively by Sessions, omission to do so does not by itself vitiate subsequent trial unless objection is raised at an appropriate stage and prejudice to the accused is established; since the objection was only raised at the stage of arguments after completion of most of the trial, the High Court erred in directing a fresh inquiry, and the Sessions Court should complete the hearing and dispose of the case on merits.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; order of the High Court set aside.

Orders

  • Sessions Judge directed to complete hearing of arguments and dispose of the case on merits in accordance with law.
  • High Court's direction to conduct fresh enquiry by Magistrate under Section 202(2) Cr.P.C. set aside.