HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) THIS order governs two references made by the Sessions Judge, Bhopal in two criminal cases, which have been registered in this court as Criminal Revisions Nos. 21 and 22 of 1955. Criminal Revision No. 21 of 1955 arises out of the criminal case instituted by Desouza against Shrimati Aijaz Masih and other Criminal Revision No. 22 of 1955 arises out of criminal case instituted by the same Desouza against Kumari Sheela and others.
(2.) THE women accused of in two cases did not appear in the trial court after the service of summonses on them but moved applications for exemption from personal attendance. These applications were dismissed. They went up in revision before the Sessions Judge, Bhopal who has made a reference to this Court for quashing the order of the learned Magistrate. The recommendation being (sic) made by the Sessions Judge has not been clearly indicated but what I gather from the opinion expressed by him in that according to him, the women accused should have been exempted from personal attendance.
(3.) THE learned Counsel for the applicants strongly urged that the interpretation given to Section 205 (1), Criminal P. C. by the learned Magistrate is not correct and, in any case, is contrary to an earlier decision of this Court. In view of the fact that I am reconsidering this question which is of great importance to the litigant public and would lay down instructions for the guidance of the Magistrates how to properly exercise their discretion in cases in which all or some of the accused belong to the female sex, it is not necessary to decide these references with special reference to the earlier decision of this Court.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.