BHAVANJIBHAI PREMJIBHAI SHAH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner-original complainant has filed a private complaint against the respondent No.2 and other accused persons before the Court of learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad for the offence punishable under Sections 34, 114, 120(B), 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. Below the said complaint the trial court has passed the order by giving direction that the investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 be carried out by CID Crime, Economic Cell, Ahmedabad. On basis of the said complaint, the CID Crime, Economic Cell, Ahmedabad have registered the complaint for the aforesaid offence against the original accused No.3 only and it is being numbered as Criminal Case No.4 of 2002.

(2.) THE present petitioner " original complainant submitted application Exh.21 and prayed for to carry out further investigation under Section 173(8) of Cr.P.C. THE said application was rejected by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate by its order dated 30.1.2008. Against the said order the present petitioner has preferred Criminal Revision Application before the Sessions Court at Ahmedabad along with delay condone application which was being numbered as Criminal Misc.Application No.3413 of 2008 and there is a delay of 190 days caused in preferring the revision application. THE learned Sessions Judge rejected the said application and hence this petition.

(3.) IN view of the above, the petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 9.2.2009 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.13, Ahmedabad City below condonation of delay application in Criminal Misc.Application No.3413 of 2008 is hereby quashed and set aside and Criminal Misc.Application No.3413 of 2008 is hereby allowed. The Sessions Court is directed to decide the revision application, as early as possible, preferably within three months from the receipt of writ of this order. It is submitted by learned advocates for both the parties that they will not ask unnecessary adjournments before the Sessions Court. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.