Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Gopal Vs. State

Gopal vs State

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Decided Oct 29, 1957
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/753007

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Rajasthan High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Criminal Ref. No. 38 of 1957
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

-

Key legal issue
Criminal
Acts & sections
Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1898 - Sections 207A and 208; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 307

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Gopal

Advocate G.S. Bhargava, Adv.

Respondent

State

Advocate B.C. Chatterjee, Adv.

Legal References

Acts
Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1898 - Sections 207A and 208; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 307
Reported In
AIR1958Raj152

Excerpt

- .....according to the procedure laid down in section 207a of the criminal procedure code. gopal filed a revision and the learned sessions judge was of the view that as the complainfe-had been consolidated with the challan, the procedure under section 208 cr. p. c. and subsequent sections should have been followed in the case. in our opinion the initial mistake lay in consolidating the police challan with the complaint. according to the amended criminal procedure code the procedure for enquiry in cases triable by the court of session on police report has been simplified and by tagging the police challan with the complaint the very-purpose of expediting trial is frustrated. the procedure under section 208 and subsequent sections is different and the reason for this difference is that while the police is not interested in one or the other party, the complainant is a person interested and satisfactory evidence is necessary to be recorded by the court before it comes to the conclusion that the accused should be committed.3. we, therefore, direct that the challan should be separated from the complaint and while the challan may be proceeded against according to section 207a of the code, the procedure in respect of the complaint may be followed under section 208 and subsequent sections. the two should be enquired into separately.

Full Judgment

K. L. Bapna, J.

1. This is a reference by the learned Sessions Judge, Jaipur City.

2. Kotwali Police, Jaipur produced a challan on 17-4-1956, against one Radhey Shyam for an offence under Section 307 I. P. C. triable by the court of session. The complainant Panchu subsequently, filed a complaint on 22-5-1956 again-st six persons including Radhey Shyam for having committed the offence under Section 307 I. P. C. in respect of the same incident. The Assistant Collector and Magistrate First Class, Jaipur City passed an order consolidating the two proceedings and began to proceed against all the accused in one proceeding. An application was submitted on behalf of one of the accused Gopal that the procedure prescribed under Section 208 Cr. P. C. and subsequent sections be followed in the case. The Magistrate, however, preferred to proceed according to the procedure laid down in Section 207A of the Criminal Procedure Code. Gopal filed a revision and the learned Sessions Judge was of the view that as the complainfe-had been consolidated with the challan, the procedure under Section 208 Cr. P. C. and subsequent sections should have been followed in the case. In our opinion the initial mistake lay in consolidating the police challan with the complaint. According to the amended Criminal Procedure Code the procedure for enquiry in cases triable by the court of session on police report has been simplified and by tagging the police challan with the complaint the very-purpose of expediting trial is frustrated. The procedure under Section 208 and subsequent sections is different and the reason for this difference is that while the police is not interested in one or the other party, the complainant is a person interested and satisfactory evidence is necessary to be recorded by the court before it comes to the conclusion that the accused should be committed.

3. We, therefore, direct that the challan should be separated from the complaint and while the challan may be proceeded against according to Section 207A of the Code, the procedure in respect of the complaint may be followed under Section 208 and subsequent sections. The two should be enquired into separately.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial