LALIT KISHORE SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -This is a revision against the judgment and order dated 8.6.2007 passed by Sri R. K. Mishra, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 2, Banda in Criminal Revision No. 165 of 2006, Jokhu Khan and others v. State of U. P. and another.

(2.) THE facts relevant for disposal of this revision are that the complainant revisionist Lalit Kishore had filed a complaint against the accused Jokhu Khan, Ram Kumar, Kalu Ram Doharey and Rasik Kishore Singh (opposite party Nos. 2 to 5) in the Court of the learned C.J.M., Banda under Sections 114, 116, 167, 193, 323, 340, 504, 452, 506, I.P.C. with these allegations that the accused Jokhu Khan who was then S.O. in-charge of P.S. Baberu District Banda, and Kalu Ram Doharey in-charge Inspector P.S. Kotwali, Baberu and Constable Ram Kumar (opposite party Nos. 2 to 4) had forcibly entered the house of Lalit Kishore and Shyam Kishore at Baberu District Banda on 4.8.2004 and had forcibly taken them to police outpost Murval where their younger brother Rasik Kishore Singh (accused opposite party No. 5) and his wife Rita were also present. Jokhu Khan and Kalu Ram Doharey, accused opposite parties No. 2 and 3 alongwith police personnel beat them by shoes, Chappals and sticks and thereafter the police challaned the complainant on 5.8.2004 under Sections 151, 107 and 116, Cr. P.C. THE complainant, on account of this beating, got injuries. He got his injuries medically examined in the District Hospital Banda on 6.8.2004 and then filed a complaint against the accused opposite parties which was registered as Criminal Case No. 4224 of 2004 in the Court of C.J.M., Banda. All the accused persons including the police personnel named in the complaint were summoned vide order dated 10.11.2004.

(3.) THEREAFTER, the accused moved another application under Section 197, Cr. P.C., before the C.J.M. Again an objection was taken from the side of the complainant that the accused had not personally appeared and had not applied for bail and so the application under Section 197, Cr. P.C., moved by them could not be entertained. This objection was upheld by the learned C.J.M. and so the application under Section 197, Cr. P.C., was rejected for non-compliance of the order of this Court passed in the aforesaid criminal misc. case under Section 482, Cr. P.C.