Trial u/s 138 NIA & Section 251 CrPC
After service of Bailable Warrants, the accused appears, and is granted bail but is not told the substance of the charge by the Court. The accused (with the aid of experienced lawyers) starts o playing game with the process and even after 30 hearings the Court could not make him to hear the substance of the charge (despite the fact that he always appears in the Court). This is done by filing repetitive applications in piece meal. Examples:
1.First the cognizance order is challenged (Which naturally gets dismissed with costs).
2.Now the accused presents an application to the Court for quashing the complaint (This according to the accused is not the same thing as quashing the cognizance). In his application he seeks a reply from the complainant. The complainant refuses to give any reply (to this absurd application) and asks the Court to decide it on its own.
3.Now the accused presents another application praying to the court to direct the complainant to file a written reply.
The Court dismisses the application at Srl No 3 & 2 both with heavy costs with heavy costs
4. The accused files another application with the Court urging the Court to review its decisions. The Court dismisses the application at Srl No 3 & 2 both with heavy costs with heavy costs
5. Now the accused files another application requesting the court to discharge the accused u/s 251 CrPC
With all these applications the accused manages to scuttle the process of Court and avoid the stage of the substance of the charge to be recited to him
1.The accused is not paying the costs awarded which have totalle dto Rs 8000/- and the Court seems helpless. What is the remedy available to the complainant in these circumstances?
2. Can in summons trial the Court hear application for discharge by the accused in NIA cases?
3. Chapter XX of the Code does not provide for any procedure like discharge in summons Trial. So how can a Court entertain such an application??