ADITYA PRATAP SINGH ALIAS PAPPU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

(2.) THE present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has been filed for quashing the order dated 26.07.2010 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siddharth Nagar in Criminal Case No. 4439 of 2006 (State Vs. Aditya Pratap Singh alias Pappu and others), under Sections 143, 353, 504, 506 I.P.C., and Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Siddharth Nagar, District Siddharth Nagar whereby discharge application filed by the applicant has been rejected as well as for quashing of of the revisional Court's order dated 10.11.2010 passed by learned Sessions Judge, District Siddharth Nagar whereby criminal revision filed against the aforesaid order has been rejected as well as for quashing of the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 4439 of 2006.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the applicant has further referred to Section 52 of the Prisoners Act to show that it was in the exclusive jurisdiction of the Superintendent of the Jail to have either enquired the matter himself or if he found that the matter is heinous, he may refer the matter to the District Magistrate or any Magistrate Ist Class having jurisdiction to try the matter. In this regard learned counsel has also referred to paragraph 808 of the U.P. Jail Manual and has argued that it is the discretion of the Superintendent of the Jail to determine with respect to any act under the Indian Penal Code whether he would use his own powers of punishment or move the Magistrate to enquire into, it in accordance with the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Learned Counsel has relied upon a reported decision of this Court reported in 1982 A.L.J. 133 in the matter of Dharampal Vs. State of State of U.P. and others in support of his contention.