Examination of witnesses in absence of accused Section 299 of Cr.P.C.:A. S. RAVI, DISTRICT JUDGE

[@Iguana2289]

Fabulous session sir

[@MrKherwa]

Very nicely explained by Respected Sir ..all doubts washed away...

[@ubyadav6923]

Lordship thanks for valuable time for us and Vikas sir we r grateful thanks sharing knowledge of law great job that I bow my head to you 🙏🙏🙏🙏

[@ASRavi1]

Thank you brother. Have you received my notes? If not forward your number or email

[@yawaralikhanasif2761]

Very well explained sir Thanks for sharing this treasure sir

[@akazagarsamiadvocate4097]

Juvenile cannot be declared as proclaimed offender under sec 82 crpc awesome wonderful seminar with vast experience. Sumup from 45 th min is highly useful

[@ASRavi1]

Thanks Brother. I have answered Juvenile issue in page 18 and 19 of my notes. Have you received? If not forward your number or email.

[@akazagarsamiadvocate4097]

Thanku very much sir [e-mail]

[@samjapasingh3885]

Well explained Judge

[@ASRavi1]

Thank you

[@padmanjalinanduri4115]

What is said by the speaker about Sri Vikas ji at the beginning of the session is exactly 100% correct, I think we are really indebted to him and the speaker's voice and flow of speech is very very excellent and understandable. Thank you sirs.

[@ASRavi1]

Thank you madam.

[@adv.ramneeksingh]

Very informative session 7 6.21

[@ASRavi1]

Thank you

[@suneeshkumar9386]

Sir, explained very well. A doubt to clear. As per schedule 1 CrPC, section 174A IPC part i & ii are cognizable and non-bailable. However, it is a complaint case due to bar imposed by section 195 (1) (a) CrPC (as section 174 A is placed in between 172 & 188 IPC). Court cannot take cognizance upon police report. Then who is to file complaint for taking cognizance in case of section 174 A IPC?

[@ASRavi1]

See 'Maneesh Goomer Vs State', 2012(1)JCC 465, Moti Singh Sikarwar Vs State of U.P. And Another on 29 November, 2016 indiankanoon.org/doc/158656715/ The Hon'ble Allahabad High Court held that the bar of Section 195 (1)(a) Cr.P.C. is not applicable to the present case and a private person is competent to lodge a complaint or even an F.I.R. under Section 174-A I.P.C.. In 'State Vs Proclaimed Offenders of Delhi and others', Crl.No.2021/2010, decided on 11.08.2010 held that supplementary charge-sheet under Section 174 IPC can be filed or the offence under Section 174A IPC can be added in the main charge-sheet. In the Judgement of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in Ajai Pratap Singh @ Ajai Sipahi Vs The State Of U.P. & Anr. on 21 January, 2020 indiankanoon.org/doc/165551752/ In the Judgement of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in S.Brathibha Vs The State on 24 July, 2015 indiankanoon.org/doc/89653810/ , which held that there is no bar in the Cr.P.C preventing a private person from lodging a Police complaint and the bar is only with regard to taking of congizance of the offence under Section 190 Cr.P.C read with 195 Cr.P.C.

[@suneeshkumar9386]

@@ASRavi1 Thank you very much sir. Judgment of Madras HC (S. Brathibha v. State) is in par with SC verdict in State of Panjab v. Raj Singh (1998 ) 2 SCC 391. Even though the dictum laid down in Moti Sigh Sirkawar case of Allahabad HC is hard to digest (how 172 to 188 exclude 174 A? even if it is introduced in 2006) - we have to accept it (Res Judicata Pro Veritate Accipitur). Once again I express my sincere gratitude my lirdship in finding time for such an elaborative and convincing reply 🙏🙏🙏

[@ASRavi1]

@@suneeshkumar9386 Yes brother. Thank you for motivation

[@rajeshranga4873]

Sir kindly send notes of this lecture also

[@robertlhungdim0104]

Wats the name of the case mentioned in 12.09 sec .. state by r t nagar vs manikanda . Plz help.

[@surendrakumar-sr7rs]

Good

[@ASRavi1]

Thank you brother