SANDHYA RANI MEHTA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, learned Counsel for the Respondent-C.B.I. as also learned Counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2. Though after hearing the learned Counsel, I am of the opinion that this case shall have to be kept in abeyance before final decision, yet the arguments advanced by the counsel painstakingly are recorded for appreciation.

(2.) In the present application, the Petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated-09.02.2009, passed by the S.D.J.M.-cum-Special Judicial Magistrate, C.B.I., Dhanbad in R.C. Case No. 1(S)/07/CBI/SCB/LKN, whereby cognizance for the offences under Sections 120-B, 323, 304 and 343 of the I.P.C. was taken and the Petitioner has been summoned to face trial.

(3.) The primary ground on which the impugned order of cognizance has been challenged, involves a controversial question of law, whether the Magistrate, in exercise of his powers under Section 190 of the Code of Criminal Procedure while taking cognizance of the offences including Sessions triable offences, against such of the accused who were chargesheeted, can take cognizance against such other accused who were not chargesheeted?