HANUMAN PRASAD Vs. STATE AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application in revision arose out of proceedings under Sec. 145 Criminal Procedure Code. The proceedings started on the basis of a police report. A number of persons were then impleaded by the learned Magistrate as opposite parties and were directed to file their written statements. One of them was Bhagwati Prasad Pandey. Written statements were filed. Affidavits and documents were produced. The Magistrate could not decide the question of possession himself and made a reference to the Munsif under Sec. 146 of the Code. While the reference was pending before the Munsif, Bhagwati Pd. Pandey died. The Munsif thereupon sent the case back to the learned Magistrate for bringing on record the legal representatives of Bhagwati Pd. Pandey as permitted by sub-section (7) of Sec. 145. Bhagwati Pd. Pandey had left three sons including the present applicant Hanuman Prasad Pandey. All the three sons of Bhagwati Pd. Pandey were impleaded in the case in his place as his legal representatives. One of them Sarju Prasad Pandey wag actually present when the order impleading the legal representatives was passed but the other two were not there. The learned Magistrate after having impleaded all the three sons directed notice to issue to the two sons who were not present at the time of his order to enable them to appear before the learned Munsif on a specified date. Against the order of the Magistrate impleading him as a legal representative of the deceased the applicant went up in revision to the learned Sessions Judge. The point he took was that he could not have been impleaded as a legal representative of the deceased without having been served with a notice to show cause. The point did not impress to the learned Sessions Judge who dismissed the application in revision summarily taking the view that no ground for interference had been made out.

(2.) The applicant Hanuman Prasad has now come to this Court in revision and it is urged on his behalf that he could not have been impleaded as a legal representative of the deceased without a notice being served upon him and that by his being impleaded in that manner he is likely to be greatly prejudiced as he will not be in a position to examine himself as a witness or to produce other evidence before the learned Munsif or in subsequent proceeding before the learned Magistrate.

(3.) Sub-section (7) of Sec. 145 Criminal Procedure Code reads like this:-