VIKAS YADAV Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -This criminal appeal has been filed by Vikas Yadav under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Cr. P.C.'). There is a prayer under Section 389 (1), Cr. P.C. for an interim order for bail and suspension of the execution of sentence and stay of realisation of the fine. The Stamp Reporter has given a note in his report that the order under challenge has been passed by an Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi. When the matter was taken up yesterday, i.e., 9.7.2008, an objection was raised from the complainant's side that the Allahabad High Court does not have territorial jurisdiction to entertain this appeal. The matter was heard yesterday and was adjourned for today on the request from the appellant's side.

(2.) WE have heard Sri V. C. Tewari, senior advocate assisted by S/Sri Manish Tewari and G. K. Bharti from the appellant's side, Sri G. S. Chaturvedi, senior advocate assisted by Sri Samit Gopal for the complaint and the learned A.G.A. Sri R. K. Singh at length again today on the question of the jurisdiction of the Allahabad High Court regarding this appeal.

(3.) SIMILARLY, the other decisions relied upon from the appellant's side namely Haji Esmail Noor Mohammad and Co. and others v. Competent Officer, AIR 1967 SC 1244 and U. P. Rashtriya Chini Mill Adhikari Parishad v. State of U. P. and others, AIR 1995 SC 2148, are in respect of the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, which unlike Section 374, Cr. P.C. permits a writ petition to be filed before the High Court within the territorial jurisdiction of which the cause of action either wholly or in part arises. Therefore, these two decisions are also totally irrelevant.