YOGENDRA SINGH Vs. STAQTE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Vishnu Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. and Sri A. K. Awasthi and Manish Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondents Nos. 2 to 8.

(2.) This writ petition has been filed against the order dated 16-8-2002, passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge/Special Judge (E.C. Act), Banda in Criminal Revision No. 156 of 2002, whereby the order dated 24-4-2002, passed by learned Addl. Civil Judge (Jr. Div.)/Judicial Magistrate, Banda was set aside and the record was sent back to the Court of learned Addl. Civil Judge (Jr. Div.) Banda and order dated 19-9-2003 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Banda in Criminal Revision No. 93 of 2003, whereby the revision filed by the respondents Nos. 2 to 8 was allowed and the order dated 17-4-2003 passed by learned Civil Judge (Jr. Div.) Judicial Magistrate, Banda taking cognizance for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 149, 323, 504, 506, IPC and summoning the opposite parties Nos. 2 to 8 to face the trial in the abovementioned offences in Criminal Case No. 81/IX of 2002, was set aside.

(3.) The facts, in brief, of the present case are that the petitioner moved an application under Section 156(3) Cr. P.C. in the Court of learned I Addl. Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Banda, the same was allowed by learned I Addl. Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Banda on 14-12-2001 and the S.O. of the Police Station Marka was directed to register the case and investigate the same. In pursuance of that order, the FIR was registered at Police Station Marka on 22-12-2001 at 1-30 p.m. in Case Crime No. 86A of 2001 under Sections 147, 149, 323, 504, 506, IPC against the respondents Nos. 2 to 8. After doing the investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted the final report dated 29-1-2002 mentioning therein that the accused respondents Nos. 2 to 8 were falsely implicated. Against that final report, the petitioner filed a protest petition along with affidavit. Thereafter the learned Addl. Civil Judge (Jr. Div), Banda after considering the evidence collected by Investigating Officer, came to the conclusion that prima facie offence punishable under Sections 147, 149, 323, 504, 506, IPC is made out against the accused respondents Nos. 2 to 8 and there is sufficient ground to proceed further. So the final report dated 29-1 -2002 was rejected and accused respondents Nos. 2 to 8 were summoned to face the trial for the aforesaid offences on 24-4-2002. The order dated 24-4-2002 was challenged by the accused persons by way of filing Criminal Revision No. 156 of 2002, the same was allowed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge/Special Judge (E.C. Act) on 16-8-2002 by observing that it was proper for the Magistrate to record the statements of the witnesses under Sections 200 and 202, Cr. P.C. treating the protest petition as complaint and the record of the case was again sent back to the Court of learned Magistrate to pass a fresh order in accordance with the provisions of the law. Thereafter, the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Banda, in pursuance of the order dated 16-8-2002 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge/Special judge (E.C. Act), recorded the statement of the petitioner under Section 200, Cr. P.C. and the statements of witnesses Surendra Singh and Indra Pal were recorded under Sections 202, Cr. P.C. Thereafter, the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Banda came to the conclusion that on the basis of the allegations made against the accused respondents Nos. 2 to 8, prima facie offence under Sections 147, 149, 323, 504, 506, IPC is made out, so he took the cognizance and summoned the respondents No's. 2 to 8 to face the trial for the aforesaid offences on 17-4-2003. The order dated 17-4-2003 was challenged by the accused respondents Nos. 2 to 8 by way of filing Criminal Revision No. 93 of 2003, the same was allowed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Banda on 19-9-2003 by setting aside the order dated 17-4-2003 passed by learned Civil Judge (Jr. Div)/ Judicial Magistrate, Banda, for taking cognizance and summoning the accused respondents Nos. 2 to 8. Against that order, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.