Supreme Court: Magistrate Can’t Direct Police to Add Accused.

Last Updated on March 22, 2025 by NewsDesk SLC

The Supreme Court ruled that the judge had no power to direct the police to include the name of the accused person in the existing fee. Instead, the court ruled that he could only summon summons if there was sufficient reasons. This decision resulted in a case where the petitioner questioned their integration in a fee -based fee based on the judge’s directive and claimed that such a supplement lacked the basis under criminal proceedings.

In a particular case, the petitioner claimed that their name was incorrectly included in the fee sheet, because under the procedural Code there is no legal provision. The Supreme Court agreed with the petitioner and acknowledged that the judge actually made a mistake when he ordered the police to integrate the name in the fee. However, the Court also explained that the judges have the power to realize offenses and issue pre -summons for individuals who were not included in the final report of the police.

While the Supreme Court acknowledged the incorrect procedure followed by the judge, he eventually confirmed the summons of the summons as a legally appropriate outcome. Therefore, the Court of Justice refused to overturn the decision of the High Court concerning the summons. This decision illustrates the court’s intention to maintain a balance between procedural correctness and the legal validity of measures taken under these procedures.

The case is recorded as GoPal Pradhan vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors. (2025 Livelaw (SC) 328) and emphasizes the principle that while the courts may issue summons in response to the recognition of crimes, they cannot get the police to directly change the leaves of fees. This resolution clarifies the procedure steps needed when new accused persons are designed to be added to the ongoing legal matters.