VIJAY KUMAR BANSAL & ANR. Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition to seek the setting aside of orders dated 09.01.2013 and 10.05.2016 passed by the learned ASJ, and the order dated 21.01.2015 passed by the learned MM, Saket Courts, Delhi, whereby the application of the petitioners under Section 256 Cr PC was dismissed. Though the writ petition in its title invokes Article 226 with Article 227 of the Constitution of India, upon an objection being raised by the respondent that a writ petition under Article 226 would not lie to assail a judicial order, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the present petition may be treated as one under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, namely, under the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court.

(2.) The factual background, as extracted by the learned ASJ-04 and Spl Judge (NDPS) South East, Saket Courts, Delhi in the impugned order dated 10.05.2016 passed in Crl. Revision No.148/2015 titled, "Vijay Kumar Bansal & Pradeep Kumar Bansal v. State" is as follows:

(3.) Pertinently, this order of the learned ASJ dated 09.01.2013 (which is also one of the order assailed in the present petition) was accepted by the petitioners inasmuch, as, they did not challenge the same and chose to participate in the proceedings after the remand before the learned Magistrate. It is also pertinent to note that after remand, the learned Magistrate on 24.05.2014, dismissed the application under Section 256 Cr PC filed by the petitioners. At the same time, the learned Magistrate held that the case did not fall within her jurisdiction.