307 ipc triable by which court in tamil nadu

Vijay Kumar (Querist) 08 May 2023 This query is : Resolved
In AIR 2022 SC 670 Joseph Stephen v. Santhanasamy, there is a mention of Trial of 307 IPC case by Magistrate Court.

Whether there is any amendment to First Schedule to CrPC in this regard in Tamil Nadu?

Follow Query

Report Abuse

Quick Summary

Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) concerning attempts to murder is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions across India, including Tamil Nadu. This offence is cognizable, meaning police can arrest without a warrant, and is non-bailable and non-compoundable, meaning it cannot be easily resolved outside of court proceedings. While a recent Supreme Court case mentioned a Magistrate Court's involvement, it pertained to specific acquittals and the matter was remitted for further review, not establishing a general rule for Magistrate trials of 307 IPC cases.

T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate (Expert) 09 May 2023
Offence under section 307 is cognizable and a warrant should ordinarily be issued in the first instance. It is non-bailable as well as non-compoundable and is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions.

Dr J C Vashista (Expert) 10 May 2023
Provisions of Indian Penal Code, 1860 apply to all the States and UTs in India, which do not differ State to State (especially Tamil Nadu of your query).

Offence under Section 307 IPC is triable by the Court of Sessions, cognizable, non-bailable and non-compoundable (in India).

Vijay Kumar (Querist) 10 May 2023
I am in complete agreement with you, respected sirs.
But in AIR 2022 SC 670 Joseph Stephen v. Santhanasamy, there is a mention of Trial of 307 IPC case by Magistrate Court.

Dr J C Vashista (Expert) 11 May 2023
Kindly read the judgment again where you may find the High Court order on 307 / 506 IPC has been dealt separately since
"the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruchirapalli, by judgment dated 28.09.2012, convicted the accused under the aforesaid offences except Sections 307 and 506(ii) IPC and thereby acquitted the accused under Sections 307 and 506(ii) IPC."

N.K.Assumi (Expert) 12 May 2023
Joseph Stephen v. Santhanasamy, is an interesting case involving substantial question of laws. However, both the High Courts and the Supreme Court did not touch upon the question of failure to exercise or exercise of excessive jurisdictions by the court, except the question of appeal vs revision, acquittal vs convictions.

P. Venu (Expert) 12 May 2023
The matter stands remitted to the High Court -

"13. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, the impugned common judgment and order passed by the High Court reversing the acquittal and convicting the accused is hereby quashed and set aside. The matters are remitted to the High Court. The High
Court is directed to treat the revision applications as appeals under Section 372 Cr.P.C. and thereafter to decide and dispose of the same in accordance with law on their own merits"

As such, it is too hasty to make any suggestion.

Previous

Next

You need to be the querist or approved LAWyersclub expert to take part in this query .

Click here to login now

Similar Resolved Queries :

Ask Query
Unanswered Queries