SMT. SHYAMVATI Vs. PRATAP VERMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) With the consent of the parties heard the matter finally at the motion stage itself.

(2.) Facts in brief required for disposal of the instant Cr.M.P. are that the petitioners/complainant had filed a Complaint Case before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Tilda, District Raipur against respondents 1 and 2 for taking cognizance and further trial under Sections 302/34, 120B of the Indian Penal Code (for brevity the IPC). On behalf of the complainant/applicant, 8 witnesses have been examined before the concerned Magistrate in support of the complaint. After hearing the complainant, the Court below passed the order on 16.6.2015 and while discussing the entire evidence in the matter, held that there is no material prima facie against the respondent/accused A1 and A2 to register the case under Sections 302/34, 120B IPC. Hence, the Court below dismissed the complaint under Sec. 203 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity the Cr.P.C.). Against the said order, the complainant/revisioner preferred a Cr. Revision. The Sessions Judge, Raipur vide order dated 13.10.2015 in Cr. Revision No.279/2015 held that there is no error in the impugned order, hence, dismissed the said Cr. Revision and affirmed the order passed by the Magistrate dated 16.6.2015. Against the said order, the complainant/applicants have preferred the instant Cr.M.P. and prayed that jurisdiction under Sec. 482 of Crimial P.C. be invoked and the order passed by the trial Court be set aside and the trial Court be directed to register the case against respondents 1 and 2 in the interest of justice.

(3.) The grounds taken on behalf of the complainant/applicants are that the order passed by the trial Court is contrary to the facts and evidence on record, illegal and without properly appreciating the facts and statement available on record. The Court below committed a grievous error for appreciating the statement of the Doctors who examined the dead body of the deceased-Gokul Nishad at the time of postmortem. As the order impugned is illegal and erroneous hence, it is submitted that the order passed by the trial Court be set aside and Court below be directed to register the case against respondents 1 and 2.