DHARMENDRA KUMAR SHARMA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VINOD Prasad, J. Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and learned A. G. A. Application of the revisionist under Section 156 (3), Cr. P. C. filed before C. J. M. , Agra disclosed the offences under Sections 302 and 201/34, IPC relating to Police Station Tajganj, District Agra. The said application was, however, transferred for disposal by the C. J. M. , Agra to the Court of A. C. J. M. , Agra, but the A. C. J. M. , Agra rejected the said application under Section 156 (3), Cr. P. C. on the ground that he had no jurisdiction over the police station concerned.

(2.) AFTER hearing Counsel for the applicant, I am of the view that since the application under Section 156 (3), Cr. P. C. was filed before C. J. M. , Agra, there was no error of jurisdiction in filing the said application before C. J. M. , Agra. C. J. M. Agra was the competent Court to entertain the said application. Since the application was entertained by C. J. M. , Agra and was later on transferred to the Court of A. C. J. M. , Agra, therefore, A. C. J. M. , Agra was conferred with the jurisdiction to decide the matter. Therefore, in view of this fact A. C. J. M. , Agra did not lack the jurisdiction to decide the said application. C. J. M. , Agra has got jurisdiction over all the judicial Magistrates of the District Agra under the scheme of Code of Criminal Procedure, it is he who has to allot the work to A. C. J. M. Since the application was filed before the competent Magistrate, who had transferred it to A. C. J. M. for disposal, it cannot be said that A. C. J. M. lacked jurisdiction to decide the said application. This is also the import of Section 192, Cr. P. C. which applies with full force on the facts of the present case.