Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

The Drill of Section 202 of the Cr.P.C. is Mandatory in Nature: High Court of Punjab & Haryana Sets Aside Summoning Order for Non-Compliance with Section 202 Cr.P.C. in Defamation Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana has set aside a summoning order in a defamation case for non-compliance with the mandatory procedure under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.). The order, passed by Justice Harpreet Singh Brar, emphasized the necessity of an inquiry or investigation before issuing process against a person, especially when they reside outside the jurisdiction of the court.

The crux of the judgement revolves around the adherence to procedural requirements under Section 202 of the Cr.P.C., which mandates an inquiry or investigation before summoning an individual accused of defamation under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The petitioner, Jasbir Singh, was accused of defaming the respondent, Manmohan Singh, via a WhatsApp message and was subsequently summoned by a Judicial Magistrate. The petitioner contested the summoning order, arguing that there was no compliance with the mandatory inquiry process under Section 202 Cr.P.C. before issuing the summons.

Justice Brar, in his assessment, referred to several precedents, including the Supreme Court judgments in Abhijit Pawar vs. Hemant Madhukar (2017) and National Bank of Oman vs. Barakara Abdul Aziz (2013), as well as a previous judgment of the Punjab & Haryana High Court. These cases underscored the importance of fulfilling the procedural requirements under Section 202 of the Cr.P.C.

In particular, the Court observed that the summoning order dated October 4, 2023, was passed without conducting an inquiry or investigation as required under Section 202. The Court emphasized that such non-compliance rendered the summoning order unsustainable.

Conclusively, the Court allowed the petition, setting aside the summoning order and remanding the matter back to the Judicial Magistrate for fresh consideration. The Magistrate was directed to comply with the procedural requisites under Section 202 Cr.P.C. before issuing any process.

Date of Decision: February 16, 2024

Jasbir Singh vs. Manmohan Singh

Latest Legal News