Chapter VIII
Section 112 CrPC: Procedure in respect of person present in Court
New Law Update (2024)
N/A
TRIAL COURT
Punishment
Procedural / Administrative
Cognizable?
Bailable?
Compoundable?
Bare Act Text
If the person in respect of whom such order is made is present in Court, it shall be read over to him, or, if he so desires, the substance thereof shall be explained to him.
Important Sub-Sections Explained
Landmark Judgements
Madhu Limaye v. S.D.M., Monghyr (1971):
This landmark Supreme Court judgment laid down the constitutional validity and procedural safeguards for preventive justice under Chapter VIII of the CrPC. It emphasized that all proceedings under this Chapter, including the communication of the order under Section 112, must strictly adhere to the principles of natural justice and due process, ensuring the person is fully informed of the allegations and has an opportunity to respond.
Chandrasekhar v. State of U.P. (1998):
The Allahabad High Court in this case reiterated the critical importance of strict compliance with the procedural requirements of Chapter VIII, CrPC. It highlighted that the failure to properly communicate the substance of the order to the person present in court, as mandated by Section 112, can vitiate the entire proceedings, underscoring the fundamental right of the individual to be informed of the grounds against them.