Login : Advocate | Client
Home Post Your Case My Account Law College Law Library

Report No. 84

3.19. Punishment for violation of section 160(1) not adequate.-

Another point arising out of section 160(1), proviso of the Code of Criminal Procedure may now be discussed, namely, penalty for violation thereof. The position in this regard is not satisfactory. At present, the mere summoning of a person in violation of the statutory mandate1 would presumably be punishable as wrongful restraint under section 341, Indian Penal Code2 (imprisonment upto one month or fine upto five hundred rupees).

In our view, the punishment under section 341, I.P.C. is, inadequate for an offence of this nature. Perhaps, a charge of an offence under section 166, Indian Penal Code (public servant disobeying direction of law with intent to cause injury to any person) could be made for the violation of the prohibition in question. But, in our opinion, it would be better to have a specific provision-say, as section 166A-in the Indian Penal Code to cover such violations. The provision could be appropriately placed in the Chapter on "Offences by or against public servants". The proposed offence should be cognisable, bailable and triable by any Magistrate.

1. Section 160(1), Proviso, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

2. Raja Ram v. State of Haryana, (1971) 3 SCC 945 (949).

Rape and Allied Offences - Some Questions of Substantive Law, Procedire and Evidence Back

Client Area | Advocate Area | Blogs | About Us | User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Media Coverage | Contact Us | Site Map
powered and driven by neosys