SHAHRUKH ZIYA MOHAMMAD Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and with the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal.

(2.) In this Writ Petition we are confronted with an unusual situation, wherein the action of the learned Sessions Judge, Nagpur of suo moto taking cognizance of the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.4, Nagpur (Magistrate), has been called in question. The petitioner is one of the kin of deceased in the incident who has raised challenge to the action of Sessions Judge of suo moto invoking revisional jurisdiction vide impugned order dated 30. 09.2024. The challenge is on the ground that there is neither propriety, nor cause for the learned Sessions Judge to invoke suo moto powers for examining the order of the Magistrate.

(3.) It necessitates us to make a brief reference of few facts which are necessary for the purpose of deciding this petition. The genesis of the entire episode is a 'road accident' which took place on 25. 02.2024 around 1.30 to 1.45 a.m. at Ramjhula Bridge in which two innocents lost their lives. The police have registered Crime No.122/2024 initially for the offences punishable under Sec. 304-A, 279, 337, 338 of the Indian Penal Code and Sec. 184 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Later on the police have invoked Sec. 304 of the Indian Penal Code. The accused/respondent no.2 was initially arrested and released on bail for the offence punishable under Sec. 304-A of the Code. After invocation of Sec. 304, the respondent no.2 attempted to secure pre-arrest bail, however, failed upto this Court. By virtue of the order passed by this Court in Criminal Writ Petition No.441/2024 dtd. 30/8/2024, the investigation has been transferred to State CID.