NAVRANG Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against an order of Munsif Magistrate dismissing revision under Section 89 of U. P Panchayat Raj Act.

(2.) FACTS are the revisionist filed a complaint in Panchayat Court against opposite parties No. 2 to 5 for offences under Sections 504 and 506, I. P. C. A compromise inter alia signed by the revisionist was filed before the Panchayat Court. Panchayat Court accepted that compromise and decided the case in terms of compromise.

(3.) ON behalf of the opposite parties reliance was placed on the case of Ram Charan v. Nyaya Panchayat Adalat, 1982 (19) ACC 278. and it was contended that revision under Section 397, Cr. P. C. is not maintainable. I have gone through the case. In that case order of the Nyaya Panchayat was challenged before the High Court under Section 482, Cr. P. C. In view of specific provisions of Section 83 (i) of the U. P. Panchayat Raj Act it was held that Nyaya Panchayat is not a Court for the purposes of Section 6 of Cr. P. C. Hence petition under Section 482, Cr. P. C. is not maintainable. This case is apparently distinguishable because in the instant case the order passed by the Magistrate in Revision under Section 89, Cr. P. C. has been challenged. In this connection reliance can be placed on the Division Bench case of Punni v. State of U. P. , 1971 AWR 180. In this case it was held that exercising revisional powers under Section 89 of the U. P. Panchayat Raj Act a Munsif, a Sub-Divisional Officer or Sub-Divisional Magistrate is a Court and although Section 83 excludes applicability of C. P. C. and Cr. P. C. to the Nyaya Panchayat Act in revision the context is changed. Hence it was said that it could not be said that a contrary order passed under Section 435, Cr. P. C. old would be contrary to the provision of Section 83 or 85 of the U. P. Panchayat Raj Act 1 think that this ruling creates scope for revision against a revisional order passed under Section 89 of the U. P. Panchayat Raj Act.