LAWS(ALL)-2009-6-116

RAMESH CHANDRA Vs. STATE OF U P

Decided On June 02, 2009
RAMESH CHANDRA Appellant
V/S
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Shri Moti Lal, learned counsel for the revisionist. Learned A.G.A appears for the State. The applicant is an accused in Criminal Case No. 600 of 2002, State vs. Chandra Prakash, arising out of F.I.R. in Case Crime No. 173/1998 under Section 409 I.P.C at Police Station Iglas, District Aligarh, pending before Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Aligarh. It is contended by learned counsel for the revisionist that there was no evidence of entrustment of case property against the revisionist. The Circle Officer investigating the crime found that it is difficult to state whether there was any entrustment of the property to the revisionist and did not form any opinion with regard to petitioner's involvement. Learned counsel for the revisionist contends that he was not given the charge of the items of which misplacement or misappropriation was reported. A perusal of the report of the investigation would show that the revisionist himself produced a list and could not satisfactorily explain the items which were not found. Learned counsel for the revisionist then submitted that the revisionist cannot be tried unless there is a sanction under Section 197 of Cr.P.C. On his own admission, the charge sheet has not been submitted against the revisionist as yet. The trial begins with the filing of the charge sheet and thus at this stage, it cannot be said that any trial is pending, which will require sanction under Section 197 of Cr.P.C. Lastly the counsel for the revisionist has submitted that summons were not served on the revisionist and thus the Court should not send non-bailable warrants. In the order dated 15.4.2009 the Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Aligarh observed that the accused is absent and issued non-bailalable warrants for 14.6.2006. It is difficult to believe that the incident, which took place in the year 1998, and in which a case was registered in the year 2002, was not in the knowledge of the revisionist and that he has not been served summons. The criminal revision is accordingly disposed of with observations that in case the revisionist appears before the Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Aligarh, his bail application shall be considered very expeditiously.