Yashwant Kumar Nag v. State of Chhattisgarh - S.323 CrPC
The power under Section 323 of Cr.P.C. is exercisable where there is any inquiry into an offence or trial pending before a Magistrate.
Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 323 - The power under Section 323 of Cr.P.C. is exercisable where there is any inquiry into an offence or trial pending before a Magistrate. [Context: The petitioners, charge‑sheeted inter alia under Section 409 IPC, had their case initially committed by the Magistrate to the Court of Session, which then remitted it back to the Magistrate on the ground that, as per the First Schedule to the Cr.P.C., all the offences were triable by a Magistrate. Challenging this, the petitioners argued before the High Court and then the Supreme Court that, since Section 409 IPC carries a possible life sentence which a Magistrate cannot impose under Section 29 Cr.P.C., the committal to the Sessions Court was valid and should not have been interfered with, relying on Amandeep Singh Saran v. State of Chhattisgarh. The Supreme Court held that Section 323 Cr.P.C. applies only where an inquiry or trial is actually pending before the Magistrate and, because charges had not yet been framed when the committal order was made, upheld the Sessions Court’s order remitting the case to the Magistrate while clarifying that the Magistrate may later invoke Section 323 Cr.P.C. during trial if necessary.]
Case Info
Basic Case Information
Case name: Yashwant Kumar Nag & Ors. v. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors.Neutral citation: Not mentioned in the order extract (only SLP number is given).Court & jurisdiction: Supreme Court of IndiaCase number: SLP (Crl.) No. 7220 of 2026Judgment/order date: 28 April 2026Impugned order: High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur in CRLR No. 405/2026 dated 23 March 2026
Coram
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Manoj MisraHon’ble Mr. Justice Manmohan
Statutes / Provisions Referred
Indian Penal Code, 1860:
- Section 409 IPC – Criminal breach of trust by public servant, or by banker, merchant or agent
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973:
- Section 26 Cr.P.C.
- Section 29 Cr.P.C.
- Section 323 Cr.P.C.
- First Schedule to the Cr.P.C. (classification of offences and forum of trial)
- Reference generally to Chapter XVIII Cr.P.C. (procedure after commitment to the Court of Session)
Case Law / Citations Referred
- Amandeep Singh Saran v. State of Chhattisgarh, (2024) 6 SCC 541(relied upon by the petitioners to argue that Section 26 and the First Schedule Cr.P.C. are controlled by other provisions, and that a Magistrate’s committal under Section 323 Cr.P.C. cannot be faulted.)
Brief Summary (Three Sentences)
The petitioners, charge‑sheeted inter alia under Section 409 IPC, had their case initially committed by the Magistrate to the Court of Session, which then remitted it back to the Magistrate on the ground that, as per the First Schedule to the Cr.P.C., all the offences were triable by a Magistrate. Challenging this, the petitioners argued before the High Court and then the Supreme Court that, since Section 409 IPC carries a possible life sentence which a Magistrate cannot impose under Section 29 Cr.P.C., the committal to the Sessions Court was valid and should not have been interfered with, relying on Amandeep Singh Saran v. State of Chhattisgarh. The Supreme Court held that Section 323 Cr.P.C. applies only where an inquiry or trial is actually pending before the Magistrate and, because charges had not yet been framed when the committal order was made, upheld the Sessions Court’s order remitting the case to the Magistrate while clarifying that the Magistrate may later invoke Section 323 Cr.P.C. during trial if necessary.