R. VIJAYA RANI Vs. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Revision is directed against the order passed in Crl.M.P.No. 1333 of 2017 in C.C.No.124 of 2010 dtd. 12/4/2017, by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Thiruchirappalli dismissing the petition filed under Sec. 302 Cr.P.C.,

(2.) At the outset, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend that they have filed an application before the trial Court to permit her to appoint three named Advocates as her Advocates to assist the prosecution, but, the provision of law was wrongly quoted as 302 Cr.P.C., instead of Sec. 301(2) Cr.P.C., and that the trial Court without considering the relief claimed, has treated the petition, as if the same was filed under Sec. 302 Cr.P.C., dismissed the same. It is not known as to whether the above said wrong quoting of provision of law was brought to the notice of the trial Court, but, whatever it is, as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, in the affidavit filed in support of the above application, prayed that the Court may be pleased to allow her to appoint Mr.S. Balasubramanian, Mr.V. Udhayakumar and Ms.R.Sakunthala as her advocates to assist the prosecution in her favour and the same was reiterated in the petition also.

(3.) But, it is evident from the records, that the learned trial Judge has dealt with that application as if the same was filed under Sec. 302 Cr.P.C., relied on some decisions and by observing that the petitioner has not raised any allegations against the Assistant Public Prosecutor and that since the trial itself is not commenced, the petition is not maintainable, dismissed the same.