NAWAL KISHOR GUPTA Vs. STATE OF UP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned AGA for the State.

(2.) An application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. was filed by respondent No. 3, which was rejected by A.C.J.M. Moradabad on the ground that the dispute is of civil nature. The respondent no . 3 preferred a Criminal Revision No. 200 of 2010, which was allowed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Chandausi vide order dated 23rd July, 2010. The order passed by the Magistrate was set aside and learned Sessions Judge directed S.H.O., P.S. Chandausi to register FIR on the basis of application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. filed by respondent No. 3.

(3.) The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the powers under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. can only be exercised by Magistrate and not by the Sessions Judge. If the Sessions Judge was not satisfied with the order passed by the Magistrate, then he could have remanded the matter to the Magistrate for passing a fresh order in terms of Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. but the Sessions Judge himself could not have passed an order under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C.