HARSINGH NARAIN SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against the order dated 28-5- 1976 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Phulpur-Azamgarh, committing the applicant (Harisingh Narainsingh) to the Court of Session for standing his trial under sections 186, 353, 504, 506 and 392/511 IPC.

(2.) IN March, 1974 Sri Ram Sahai Lal, opposite party no. 2 was Joint Director of Consolidation, Azamgarh. On 17-3-1974, he first went to village Hindola and distributed compensation there. Thereafter, he moved on to village Sultanpur for the same purpose. While he was distributing compensation in village Sultanpur the applicant met him there and asked him to distribute compensation meant for him and his brothers. He enquired from the applicant about his place of residence. On being told that the applicant belonged to village Hindola he told the applicant that he had already distributed compensation tin village Hindola and that he would consider his case only after he had given compensation to the people of Sultanpur. The applicant would not listen to him and insisted on getting his compensation first. He was again told to wait for his turn but he would not wait. He became restive and started quarrelling. Soon thereafter the applicant asked him to give him the file of village Hindola so that he could get his voucher prepared. On being told that the voucher was with his Reader he went to the place where the Reader had been sitting and tried to take away the file from him. The Reader took exception to this whereupon he abused the Reader. Thereafter he again approached opposite party no. 2 and using intemperate language threatened him with serious consequences. Having done that he made an attempt to forcibly remove a file from his table but he was prevented from doing so. It was in these circumstances that opposite party no. 2 filed a compnt against the applicant, under Sections 186, 353, 504 and 506 IPC in the court of A. D. M. (J) Azamgarh.

(3.) IN the result, I allow this revision and set aside the impugned order dated 28-5-1976. The case is remanded and the Magistrate is directed to decide it in accordance with law. Stay order dated 12-7-1976 is vacated. Revision allowed.