SUSHMA ANAND SHUKLA FOR SURAJ ANAND SHUKLA v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
Discusses principles of judicial procedure, contempt of court, and proper application of legal provisions.
Court: Bombay High Court
Citation: 2025:BHC-AS:28442
Decision Date: 10-07-2025
List of Laws
Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS); Arms Act, 1959; Maharashtra Police Act; Criminal Procedure
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS): The judgment discusses Section 385 of the BNSS, which pertains to punishment for contempt. The court notes that the learned Magistrate usurped power by imposing conviction under this section. The judgment also mentions Section 415 of the BNSS, stating that an appeal is generally maintainable against a conviction under the BNSS. The judgment further elaborates that for convicting someone for an offence committed during proceedings under Section 385 of BNSS, the procedure laid down under Section 391 of BNSS needs to be followed, which was not done in this case. The court also notes that punishment under Section 385 of the BNSS can be imposed when the court feels the contemnor cannot be sufficiently dealt with under Section 384 of BNSS.
- Arms Act, 1959: The judgment mentions Section 4(25) of the Arms Act, under which the petitioner was arrested. No further details or interpretation of this section are provided.
- Maharashtra Police Act: The judgment refers to Section 37(3) read with Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, under which the petitioner was arrested. No further details or interpretation of these sections are provided.
- Criminal Procedure: The judgment discusses the procedure to be followed when a court takes cognizance of an offence, referencing the case of S Rajanikanth v/s. C. Thirumagal. It states that cognizance has to be taken on the same day and that the procedure must be properly followed with an opportunity for hearing. The judgment also touches upon the issue of remand, stating that if the petitioner is convicted, it was not proper for the learned Magistrate to deal with the remand prayer, as the petitioner was already undergoing a sentence imposed by the Court.
🔒 For Members Only