Mr. Huzefa Ahmadi, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant Bank pointed out that the law laid down by this Court in the above authority is that when a proceeding is conducted as a summary trial, and when one Magistrate has partly heard the case and is succeeded by another Magistrate, that second Magistrate has to re-hear the whole case afresh and he cannot start from the stage the first Magistrate left it. There was no question of the High Court asking the entire matter to be looked into by another Magistrate de novo, in the present case because, in fact, the evidence had not been recorded in a summary manner, but it was recorded in full. Mr. Sanjanwala, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, on the other hand, submits that the law laid down in Nitinbhai Saevatilal Shah & Anr. Vs. Manubhai Manjibhai Panchal & Anr., (supra) be followed.
Supreme Court of India
Citation;2013 (4) Crime 351 (SC)
Print Page
Supreme Court of India
Mehsana Nagrik Sahkari Bank Ltd vs Shreeji Cab Co.& Ors.Etc on 12 July, 2013
Bench: H.L. Gokhale, Madan B. Lokur
Citation;2013 (4) Crime 351 (SC)
