LAWS(ALL)-1976-12-18

BALI RAM ALIAS BALLI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On December 23, 1976
BALI RAM ALIAS BALLI Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application under Section 482 of the new Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by six persons viz. Bali Ram alias Balli, Sampat, Gama, Munna, Rampat and Bal Kishan for setting aside the order dated 16-2-1976 passed by the Incharge Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi. Through that order the learned Magistrate has committed the applicants to the Court of Session to face their trial for offences of rioting and murder.

(2.) ON 1-12-1975 one Lalta gave information to the Officer-in-charge Police Station Rohania in the district of Varanasi that on 30-11-1975 at 8 A. M. the six applicants had committed cognizable offences under Sections 147, 148 and 302/149 Indian Penal Code. That information was reduced to writing and a case was registered against the applicant. The Officer-in Charge entrusted investigation of that case to the Second Officer who was subordinate to him. That officer duly investigated the case and came to the conclusion that there was sufficient evidence and also reasonable ground of suspicion to justify the forwarding of the applicants to the Magistrate who was competent to take cognizance of offences complained of. He, therefore, charge-sheeted the applicant, but instead of reporting the result of investigation to the Officer-in charge, he submitted charge-sheet before the Circle Officer of his Police Station, who is an officer of the grade of Deputy Superintendent of Po ice and, thus superior in rank to the Officer-in-Charge. The Circle Officer, in his turn, forwarded the aforesaid charge-sheet to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi, who took cognizance of the offences disclosed by it.

(3.) THE applicants went up in revision before the Sessions Judge, Varanasi wherein they challenged the validity of the commitment order on the same grounds on which legality of the charge-sheet and competence of the committing court to take cognizance were questioned in that court. The learned Sessions Judge found no force in the contentions of the applicants and dismissed their revision. They have 'now come to this Court with the present application.