FAKIRA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Chandra Kumar Singh, Advocate holding brief of Shri Rajul Bhargava, learned counsel for the revisionist, Shri R.C. Maurya, Advocate holding brief of Shri Arun Kumar Soni, learned counsel for the opposite parties and learned AGA for the State. The present revision has been filed against the judgment and order dated 18.4.2009 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 18, Agra in Criminal Revision No. 206 of 2008 (Smt. Tara Devi v. State of U.P.) whereby the Additional Sessions Judge setting aside the order dated 3.7.2008 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Agra in Criminal Misc. Case No. 4 of 2008 (Smt. Tara Vati v. Fakira) remanded the case for proceeding in accordance with the observations made in the judgment and the law laid down by Hon'ble High Court and procedure laid down by law.

(2.) The brief facts relating to the case are that upon the application of Smt. Tara Vati under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., in furtherance of the order of Magistrate, Case Crime No. 177 of 2007 under Sections 452/376 IPC was registered against Fakira, revisionist on 10.6.2007 and upon investigation final report was submitted by the investigating officer the very next day on 11.6.2007. The prosecutrix filed protest petition and upon hearing the Magistrate vide order dated 12.12.2007 rejected the final report and directed police station concerned for further investigation through some competent investigating officer. After further investigation, again final report was submitted and the prosecutrix again filed protest petition against the final report. This time after hearing counsel for prosecutrix, the Magistrate, vide order dated 3.7.2008 rejected the protest petition and accepted the final report.

(3.) Feeling aggrieved with the order dated 3.7.2008, the prosecutrix filed Criminal Revision No. 206 of 2008 before the Sessions Judge, Agra and vide impugned judgment and order dated 18.4.2009 the Additional Sessions Judge held that the prosecutrix has stated that the accused had entered in her house and committed rape on her and on her alarm, the village people who arrived there, rescued her and caught the accused at the spot and handed over to the police, so in view of the facts the Magistrate has acted wrongly in accepting the final report. Consequently allowing revision and setting aside order dated 3.7.2008, the Magistrate was directed to proceed in accordance with law.