Rejoining in 498a chanrge sheet

1. The  taking of cognizance of the complaint made u/s 190 Cr.P.C. by the same Magistrate before whom a Final Reprt (charge sheet) has been already filed by the police u/s 173 Cr.P.C.  in such particlaulr case and such Magistarte has ordered inclusion inclusion of the names of accsued though mentioned in F.I.R. but which have been subsequently deleted in the reletaed Charge Sheet by the police upon completion of their investigation - is an errant order, since inclsuion of the names of those whose have been not  inlcuded in the final report could only be added by the Magistarte by follwing and in accordance with the provision contained u/s 319 Cr.P.C. when such evidneces have been lead during the proceedings of the trial necessiating the names of such accused whsoe names have not been named in the final report submitted by the police u/s 173 Cr.p.C. 

2. Thus this order in context is errant and bad in law as per criminal procedureal law and can be impunged and challenged before the H.C. by filing a S.(Cr.) L.P. u/s 482 Cr.P.C seeking staying of such order and issuance of summons to such added persons in context 

3. If need be opt to have phone consultation with this lawyer provided that you are willing and agree to renumerate a moderate sum for such purpose.

4. You can get my contcat details by clicking my name shown in the L.H.S. margin of this feply format so that you can confirm your decision as for fixing a time for phone consultation with this lawyer.
 

Thank you very much ROHIT SHARMA ji.

Agreeing with Mr. Rohit Sarma,

Please challenge this impugned order in High Court with CrPC 401 Read with 482 CrPC and 483 CrPC. Call for the record from the trial court and argue properly since the trial has not approach to the evidence stage yet and police have already excluded some names from the final charge sheet after investigation is complete, exercising the power u/s 190 CrPC to include them again without any proper evidence is an errant order.

Pray for quashing with speedy trial i.e. 1st prayer is for quashing with aforesaid legal ground, if not granted or partially granted the there should be a 2nd prayer always for speedy trial to direct the trial court to dispose of the matter within 6 months.

Please read each of my posts carefully in the following links for sample petitions and other necessary clues.

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/Fight-against-misuse-of-498a-ipc--103100.asp#.U6gslUCm9dg

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/Best-way-to-fight-against-false-498a-103111.asp#.U6gsRkCm9dg

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/details.asp?mod_id=104564&offset=1

Originally posted by : jack
	Once charge sheet submitted to court, wife filed protection complaint crpc 190 to rejoin those 3 people and judge simply added(with out any proofs) with out our lawyer arguments or notice. Summons not yet recived, please suggest me 1)what are the best options for me to challenge this order for discharging those 3 people? 2)those 3 people are my sisters and staying way so is this ground for HC quash? 3)what if i file discharge petetion in the same court? Thanks in advance.

adding to rihit sharma's views kindly read below (& sorry for late reply just saw your PM which you sent last month):-

@jack, if you feel that the judge is biased then kindly study RECUSAL on internet & the proper authority to complaint regarding a biased judge/ MM is REG VIG/ HC