Is it purely between the complainant and the court
Errors in cognizance order.. rectification:
1. I am the sole complainant in a CC. cognizance order passed..
2. it is not thro FIR route.no police enquiry,. sworn stmnts and arguments , were done, before cognizance.
3. in the cognizance order, the JMFC omitted to list certain punishment provisions.
4. the commission of those offences , were well brought out in the complaint, but in the prayer clause, my advocate , did not mention , those punishment provisions, like 364 A for kidnapping, even though, the offence of kidnapping was brought out in the complaint. that faily advocate, was from civil law background., nor adept in criminal matters
5. a memo was put to jmfc to add those provisions. he rejected.
6. now the matter is in HC.
7. some friends say, that, we have to raise, the valid point that, cognizance and rectification, therein, are a matter, purely between the complainant and the court and hence, even though, accused have counsels, in HC, they have no right to interfere. the accused have no right of being heard, at this stage..
just like, no right till cognizance stage, hence, no right in cognizance rectification stage ..
8. is that position of law correct ?
9./ where it is laid out ?
10 any citation on the point ?
one shyamsundar sinha v. state of bihar , is on the point,
but it does not lay down that, the accused have no right of being heard here..
11. pl advise, how to sail across in the HC
Asked 12 days ago in Criminal Law from Bangalore, Karnataka