PAWAN Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 17.08.2016 a complaint was registered by the complainant/respondent no. 2, being Complaint Case No. 2019/2016, as against the present revisionists, who were posed to be the probable accused persons in the said complaint. As per the set of allegation, which was narrated by the complainant/respondent in the said complaint, it related to the probable commission of an offence under Sections 323, 316, 452, 504 and 506 of IPC, which was alleged to have been committed within the jurisdiction of Thana Kotwali, Gangnahar, Roorkee, District Haridwar.

(2.) At this stage when this Court is scrutinizing the veracity of the revisional court's order under challenge at the behest of the present revisionists, i.e. 11.03.2019, it is confined with regards to the argument, which is being extended by the learned counsel for the revisionist, that the order dated 11.03.2019 was falling without outside the ambit and scope of exercise of revisional power as vested under Section 397 by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Haridwar, whereby, while setting aside the order dated 04.06.2018, rejecting the complaint filed by respondent no. 2, by the Judicial Magistrate, the same was set aside, revision was allowed, and the matter was remitted back to the Court of Judicial Magistrate for a fresh decision on the complaint of respondent no. 2. In fact, the story, which has been narrated in the present revision by the revisionists is that as against the set of allegations registered in the complaint of 17.08.2016 of respondent no. 2, initially the proceedings under Section 200 and 202 was carried and consequently the Trial Court, is said to have passed an order on the said complaint case on 26.11.2016, whereby the complaint of respondent no. 2 was rejected by the Court of Judicial Magistrate.

(3.) Being aggrieved against the said order of rejection of complaint dated 26.11.2016, the complainant has preferred a revision by invoking the provisions contained under Section 397 of Cr.P.C., before the Court of 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Haridwar which was registered as Criminal Revision No. 605 of 2016 'Smt. Reeta Saini vs. State of Uttarakhand and Others'. The revisional court after hearing the parties concerned and by virtue of an order dated 13.03.2018, had set aside the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate in the Complaint Case No. 2019 of 2016 on 26.11.2016 and consequently, has remitted the matter back to the Trial Court for a reconsideration of the complaint exclusively on its own merits.