RAM BACHAN MISHRA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VINOD Prasad, J. An application under Section 156 (3) Cr. P. C. was filed by the applicant Ram Bachan Mishra in the Court of Judicial Magistrate-I, Gorakhpur which was registered as Criminal Misc. Case No. 175 of 2003. On 28-6- 2003, the J. M.-I, Gorakhpur found that the cognizable offence was disclosed against the accused persons and keeping in view the law laid down by the Apex Court in AIR 1988 SC 1121, he directed the police to register the F. I. R. and investigate the case. The said order was challenged by Phool Chand Yadav and Hari Ram Yadav, the two accused persons in the aforesaid application under Section 156 (3) Cr. P. C. Special Judge (Anti Corruption), Gorakhpur allowed in the aforesaid revision filed by the two accused persons vide his impugned order dated 5-5-2007 which order is under challenge in the revision by the victim, aggrieved person Ram Bachan Mishra.

(2.) I have heard learned Counsel for the revision and the learned AGA.

(3.) IT is not understandable that how the accused of cognizable offence can install the registration of F. I. R. I have perused the impugned order passed by Special Judge (Anti Corruption), Gorakhpur. First and the foremost question which should have attracted the alteration of revisional Court by the Special Judge (Anti Corruption), Gorakhpur was whether the revision filed by the proposed accused was maintainable before him or not? The said aspect of the matter was not considered at all by the Special Judge (Anti Corruption), Gorakhpur. The revision which was entertained by the lower revisional Court was not maintainable. The accused persons of cognizable offence has got no right to install the registration of F. I. R. order passed against him by the Magistrate.