ZUNAID versus STATE OF UP. & ORS.

ZUNAID versus STATE OF UP. & ORS.

The Supreme Court held that the CJM acted within lawful discretion in rejecting the Investigating Officer's final report, registering the protest petition as a complaint and proceeding under Section 200 Cr.P.C.; the High Court erred in permitting the respondents to amend their Section 482 petition after about four years and in setting aside the CJM's orders dated 15.11.2018 and 11.01.2022, and therefore the High Court orders were quashed and set aside and the CJM was directed to proceed with the complaint in accordance with law.

Parties
Appellant: ZUNAID; Respondent: STATE OF UP. & ORS.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
29 August 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against High Court Orders Under Section 482 Cr.p.c. Challenging CJM Orders in Misc. Case Arising Out of Crime No.907/2017
Outcome
Appeals allowed; impugned High Court orders quashed and set aside
Legal Topics
Section 173 Cr.p.c., Section 200 Cr.p.c., Section 202 Cr.p.c., Section 190(1)(a) Cr.p.c., Section 190(1)(b) Cr.p.c., Section 482 Cr.p.c., Police Final Report, Protest Petition, Magistrate Powers
Criminal Procedure Criminal Law Section 173 Cr.p.c. Section 200 Cr.p.c. Section 202 Cr.p.c. Section 190(1)(a) Cr.p.c. Section 190(1)(b) Cr.p.c. Section 482 Cr.p.c. +3 more

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 2 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ZUNAID

Appellant

STATE OF UP. & ORS.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against High Court Orders Under Section 482 Cr.p.c. Challenging CJM Orders in Misc. Case Arising Out of Crime No.907/2017

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Chief Judicial Magistrate acted lawfully in rejecting the police final report and treating the protest petition as a complaint proceeding under Section 200 Cr.P.C.
  2. 2 Whether the High Court erred in permitting amendment to the Section 482 petition after about four years and in setting aside the CJM's orders dated 15.11.2018 and 11.01.2022

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the CJM acted within lawful discretion in rejecting the Investigating Officer's final report, registering the protest petition as a complaint and proceeding under Section 200 Cr.P.C.; the High Court erred in permitting the respondents to amend their Section 482 petition after about four years and in setting aside the CJM's orders dated 15.11.2018 and 11.01.2022, and therefore the High Court orders were quashed and set aside and the CJM was directed to proceed with the complaint in accordance with law.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed; impugned High Court orders quashed and set aside

Orders

  • Impugned orders dated 21.07.2022 and 22.07.2022 quashed and set aside
  • Concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate directed to proceed with the complaint case in accordance with law