ASHISH MANI TRIPATHI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S. K. Jain, J. This Criminal Revision by Ashish Mani Tripathi is directed against the order dated 23-3-2002 passed by the Judicial Magistrate-III, Gorakhpur in Criminal Case No. 2753/2001, State v. Rakesh Mani and Ors. , under Sections 323, 307, 504, 506 IPC, P. S. Campierganj, District Gorakhpur, whereby the learned Magistrate refused to accept the report submitted by the S. I. S. under Section 169, Cr. P. C.

(2.) THE essential facts have to be noticed briefly for adjudication of the present petition. THE opposite party No. 2, Ram Chander Pandey made a written complaint on 13-1-2001 at 2. 10 p. m. at P. S. Campierganj, District Gorakhpur for registration of a case under Sections 323, 307, 504 and 506, I. P. C. On the basis of this written report, F. I. R. No. 5/2001 dated 13-1-2001 was registered against Rakesh Mani Tripathi, Sanjay Mani Tripathi and Ashish Mani Tripathi (the revisionist ). After investigation of the case, the charge-sheet was submitted against the three named accused in the F. I. R. THEreafter the permission for further investigation of the case was sought by the investigating agency under Section 173 (8) of Cr. P. C. THE learned Magistrate vide order dated 3-1-2002 accorded the permission for further investigation by S. I. S. Consequently, after further investigation the S. I. S. found that the revisionist at the time of occurrence was admitted in a Hospital 200 Kms. away from the place of occurrence and, therefore, S. I. S. submitted the report under Section 169, Cr. P. C. THE learned Magistrate by impugned order 23-2-2002 observed that this report cannot be accepted as cognizance has already taken and the same be kept on file.

(3.) THE learned Counsel for the revisionist has submitted that the learned Magistrate erred in not accepting the report filed by the S. I. S. under Section 169, Cr. P. C. As per the report, at the time of occurrence, the revisionist was admitted in the hospital 200 kms away from the place of occurrence, as such, the investigating agency found that his name wrongly appeared in the charge-sheet filed by the police.