DEVENDRA KUMAR VERMA Vs. ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Upon perusal of the record, it is obvious that petitioner himself is an accused in another matter and the respondent is complainant. It appears that in retaliation of that the petitioner tried to institute Criminal Case through application moved under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., in which learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, after examining the matter, did not find substantial ground, therefore, he rejected the same.

(2.) Mr. Rajendra Kumar Dwivedi, learned A.G.A. raised objection against the maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that it is an absolutely discretionary power of the learned Magistrate to entertain the application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. or not. He also cited several decisions on this point, one of them is the case of Mohammad Asrar v. State of U.P.,2010 71 AllCriC 659].

(3.) However, the petitioner is granted liberty to file a complaint before the learned Magistrate concerned.