Niyam v2 is live — start for just ₹100 — 200 credits to try

november 2004

Supreme Court of India · 2004-11-25

Om Hemrajani vs State Of U.P. & Anr

Citation / case number
AIR 2005 SUPREME COURT 392
Court
Supreme Court of India
Petitioner
Om Hemrajani
Respondent
State Of U.P. & Anr
Author
D.M. Dharmadhikari
Bench
D.M. Dharmadhikari

Judgment text excerpt

The Supreme Court interpreted Section 188 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, clarifying that the phrase 'at which he may be found' pertains to the responsibility of the authorities to locate the accused for jurisdictional purposes. The Court upheld the High Court's ruling that the Special Judicial Magistrate at Ghaziabad had jurisdiction to entertain the complaint, rejecting the petitioner's argument that no cause of action occurred within that jurisdiction. The Court emphasized that the interpretation of Section 188 should not lead to unnecessary harassment of the accused, but affirmed the existing jurisdiction based on the facts presented.

Om Hemrajani vs State Of U.P. & Anr · Niyam