UMASHANKAR RAMGOPAL SHARMA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the applicants-original accused persons call in question the legality and validity of the order dated 25th November, 2014 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.3, Ahmedabad in the Criminal Revision Application No.298 of 2014 by which the learned Judge partly allowed the application setting aside the order passed by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.15, Ahmedabad in the Criminal Case No.304 of 2014 dated 5.7.2014 and at the same time directing the Maninagar Police Station to undertake investigation of the complaint filed by the respondent No.2 herein (original complainant) under section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and file an appropriate report before the trial court within a period of 90 days.

(2.) The facts of the case may be summarized as under: 2.1 The respondent No.2 herein lodged a private complaint in the court of the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.15, Ahmedabad against the applicants herein for the offence punishable under sections 406, 420, 409, 465, 468, 469, 471, 365, 307, 342, 120(B) and 294(b) of the Indian Penal Code. The complainant prayed that the complaint be sent for police investigation through the P.I. of the Maninagar Police Station under section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. However, it appears that the learned Metropolitan Magistrate thought fit to take cognizance upon the complaint after recording verification of the complainant on oath. It appears that the learned Magistrate, thereafter, ordered police inquiry under section 202 of the Code. On receipt of the report of the police as regards the inquiry, the learned Magistrate thought fit to issue process under section 204 of the Code for the offence enumerated above.

(3.) Mr. Umesh Trivedi, the learned counsel appearing for the applicants vehemently submitted that the impugned order is erroneous. He submitted that the learned Sessions Judge has no powers to direct police investigation under section 156 (3) of the Code read with section 397 of the Code. He submitted that after quashing the order passed by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, the learned Sessions Judge should have remitted the matter to the trial court with appropriate directions to proceed further with the complaint in accordance with law. Mr. Trivedi submitted that the impugned order, being without jurisdiction, is a nullity and therefore the same be quashed.