basab banerjee
05 July 2011 at 17:15
a mother of a child below 5 years of age applied before the SD.E.M. under sec. 97 Cr.P.C. to issue search warrant for her child who is under the custody of the grand mother (mother of the father of the child). The father of the child has expired and the mother has remarried. does this custody amounts to wrongful confinement? can the SD.E.M. issue search warrant in this case and issue direction to produce the child before the competent magistrate who shall make such order as the circumstances of the case seems proper?
Anonymous
05 July 2011 at 16:51
1) Deputy Commissioner is called the District Magistrate? But which Deputy Commissioner under which law Deputy Commissioner is called the District Magistrate?
2) What do u mean by Body Warrant?
3) When can a magistrate make a order of remand? There remand means what?
Anonymous
05 July 2011 at 16:45
1) Matter is of forged muster roll. What does master roll means?
2) Tashildar means a Executive Magistrate or not.If yes than what should be the qualification of the tashildar where it has been expressed or which act governs the tashildar howto known the rights, dutities , repsonsibility each & every thing of him. Under the Crpc, 1973 it has not been defined that a Tashildar is a Executive Magistrate. The were it has been defined that a Tashildar is a Executive Magistrate?
Query: 2 Related to (State Of Maharashtra)
Thanks.
manish
05 July 2011 at 16:10
hELLO eXPERTS.....
My query is whether plea of alibi can be raised at the stage of bail?Pls anyone quote me the ruling of Supreme Court.
In one case the police has prosecte acc. for o/s 307,147,148,436 of penal code.But at the relevant time and date the accussed was working at forest office and the concerned forest oficials has also wrote letter to police and comminicated the fact of the acc. being at office.
kuldeep kumar
05 July 2011 at 14:03
limitation for filing case upto 3 years are given crpc.deciding factor is date of knowledge of offence.suppose person aggreived and police are both discovering identity of accused.what if police do not tell person aggreived the identity of accused or do not take any action then the limitation shall run out?
in case of theft both police and person aggreived are discovering identity of accused and any how 3 year passed without knowing identity of accused.is person aggreived barred now to file any case
himanshu harbola
05 July 2011 at 12:47
Mr. X got a summon from Delhi Mahila Ayog (Delhi Womens Commission ) for personal apperance in a forge complaint against Mr. X by daughtera of his elder brother for Harassment.
The commission has forwarded the summon vide its powers under the provisions of Delhi Commission for womens Act , 1994 ( Section 10 ) and it is also stated that failure to comply with the order without lawful excuse . he will be subject to the consequences of non-attendance laid down in the C.P.C.
1) Is personal apperance mandatory in such proceedings?
2) Is it a judical proceedings?
3) Can Mr. X submits a written reply that this complaint is frivolous and vexed ?
4) what should be approriate legal remedy..how should Mr. X respond...can he appoint an advocate for this ?
Ajit
05 July 2011 at 10:38
How can we file criminal complaint against public servant u/s 166 of IPC.Whether permission from the competent authority or legal notice required or not?what ingrediants are required for filing complaint in the capacity of private complaint?
Anonymous
05 July 2011 at 10:17
good morning sir,
all the following happend in district court, andhra pradesh.
my case is divorce case given to 1 senior advocate in november 2010. he told
that "he filed in jan 2011 , in feb2011 court notice sent to my wife ,
hearing will start from march". he told one case number and hearing
date on 25 april2011.
i went to court, but they wont called my name, but advocate told "your
case is a simple family case , so no need to call inside court, i managed and told your case with
judge , your next hearing date is on 11-6-11, but no compulsion to
attend, i can manage.
but on 11 june he told hearing was completed.
then i got doubt sir, because 11-6-11 is a second saturday , holiday to court.
then i went to his office and asked for xerox copies of petition copy,
and fee reciept. he told that all files are inside court , so come
after 3 days. after 3 days again i went to his office and asked copies
of my case, he told my assistant is not came , so come on tomorrow, like this story
repeated 3 times. with full doubt
on 27-6-11 morning went to his office and i asked to return my case on
the spot at any stage.
he started scoldings with high
degree of angry. even thou i demanded to return my file with all documents,
he shouted "come with vakalat to court" at 11 am i went to court with
vakalat. my advocate told, now i have many works in court, so wait for
2 hours. then i waited at court hours together. at 6 pm he returned my file and
signed on vakalat and no objection. next day i went to court office
and asked officer to return my case completely from court. then court
officer told WHY ARE YOU DECIDED TO WITHDRAW , YESTERDAY ONLY FILING
COMPLETED ?
I SHOCKED A LOT.
then i came to know the hard facts, that he not at all filed my case.
my advocate told lies 1)filed in jan, 2)court notice sent
to my wife in feb, 3)hearing on april 25 and june 11,
4) given fake number.
he filed petition copy with my fake forgered signateres.
i lost 8 months time
and Rs. 7000 money fee.
sir upto today iam not understanding
"why he
cheated me"?
7000 rupees is a small amount, already i am facing many
personnel problems and family despuits. iam a weak, depressed
and poor man . now after this cheating incident iam fully depressd
sir.
now i want to file a cheating case on cheat advocate sir, because he not only cheated me, cheaed the 'LAW' profession. so i decided to file a case ON HIM sir.
plese guide me sir,
Anonymous
05 July 2011 at 09:46
Hi,
I gave money to an old friend to purchase some land while I was away in US. He bought land using only fraction of the funds and got that land registered on his relatives and friends.
He agreed to transfer the land to me due to the intervention of the elders. He also gave promissory note for the rest of the money. He had his relatives issue cheques on whose name property was registered. They did not honour the cheques and hence cheque bounce cases were filed under Sec.138 of NI Act.
(They also failed to transfer the land) They agreed that they signed the cheques. To prove the liability we have :
1) Statement through his email account from old friend acknowleding that he took the money and how he spent to purchase lands.
2) Proof that I sent my funds to him
3) Proof that land was registered on his relatives' names
4) Proof that only part of the funds used to purchase lands
5) No dispute on signing the cheques.
Do you think this is enough to prove their liability (not debt)?
Do you think any other evidence is required to prove their liability?
Thanks in advance
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Confused which one to apply.
Crpc , 1973 Section 167 [(2A) Notwithstanding, anything contained in sub-section (1) or sub-section (2), the officer in charge of the police station or the police officer making the investigation, if he is not below the rank of a sub-inspector, may, where a Judicial Magistrate is not available, transmit to the nearest Executive Magistrate, on whom the powers of a Judicial Magistrate or Metropolitan Magistrate have been conferred, a copy of the entry in the diary hereinafter prescribed relating to the case, and shall, at the same time, forward the accused to such Executive Magistrate, and thereupon such Executive Magistrate, may, lot reasons to be recorded in writing, authoress the detention of the accused person in such custody as he may think fit for a term not exceeding seven days in the aggregate; and on the expiry of the period of detention so authorized, the accused person shall be released on bail except where an order for further detention of the accused person has been made by a Magistrate competent to make such order; and, where an order for such further detention is made, the period during which the accused person was detained in custody under the orders made by an Executive Magistrate under this sub-section, shall be taken into account in computing the period specified in paragraph (a) of the proviso to sub-section (2):
Section 167 (4) Any Magistrate other than the Chief Judicial Magistrate making such order shall forward a copy of his order, with his reasons for making it, to the Chief Judicial Magistrate.
What is the meaning of Executive Magistrate & Chief Judicial Magistrate. As I known Judicial Magistrate First Class & Second Class. Can we say that Chief Judicial Magistrate is over & above Judicial Magistrate First Class & Second Class.
Section 167 (2) (a) (ii) Sixty days, where the investigation relates to any other offence,
Section 167 (5) If in any case triable by a Magistrate as a summons-case, the investigation is not concluded within a period of six months from the date on which the accused was arrested, the Magistrate shall make an order stopping further investigation into the offence unless the officer making the investigation satisfies the Magistrate that for special reasons and in the interests of justice the continuation of the investigation beyond the period of six months is necessary.
But as per section 2 (w) "Summons - case" means relating to an offence, and not being a warrant-case;
(x) "Warrant-case" means a case relating to an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term exceeding two years;
Query: Section 167 speaks about the time limit to detain a accused under the police custody but my question is section 167 (2) (a) (ii) says for 60 days means 2 months & section 167 (5) says not more than 6 months in case the case is of summons case. Because in direct is section 167 (2) (a) (ii) it is applicable to summons case as we read clearly section 167 (2) (a) (i) because it tells about the warrant case of course is section 167 (2) (a) (ii) says about the summons case so why section 167 (5) should be implemented. Which one to follow whether section 167(5) or is section 167 (2) (a) (ii) in case of summon case because words used under is section 167 (2) (a) (ii) is any other offence because is section 167 (2) (a) (ii) has already said that it is applicable only for warrant case so is section 167 (2) (a) (ii) is applicable for summons case then again section 167 (5) says for 6 months so both the section makes it more confusing which one to apply in summons case whether is section 167 (2) (a) (ii) or section 167 (5)?