LAWS(BOM)-2005-6-93

P K PATIDAR Vs. UMAKANT B KAVLEKAR

Decided On June 23, 2005
P.K.PATIDAR Appellant
V/S
UMAKANT.B.KAVLEKAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these criminal revision applications can be disposed of by a common Order since they are arising from the same proceedings which are pending in the trial Court. The Applicants are challenging the Judgment and Order passed by the Sessions Judge, North Goa, Panaji, setting aside the Judgment and Order passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class at ponda in Criminal Case No. 8/p/99/b.

(2.) A complaint was filed by the Respondent against the present Applicants and others for offence punishable under sections 427, 447 etc. on the ground that they had committed criminal trespass on the private property of the Complainant and had removed the fence which was put up on his own property. In the trial Court, an application was filed by the present applicants under section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and it was alleged that the Applicants are public servants being the officers/employees/councillors of ponda Municipal Council and that the complaint was filed without obtaining sanction as required in terms of Section 197 of the code of Criminal Procedure and, therefore, proceedings were liable to be dropped. The trial Court allowed the application filed by the Applicants by Order dated 29-2-2000 and quashed the complaint vis-a-vis the present Applicants. Against the said Order, the Complainant initially had filed Criminal Revision Application in this Court No. 28/2000 which was disposed of by Order dated 28-9-2000 directing the Complainant to challenge the order of the Magistrate before the Sessions Court and the sessions Court was directed to decide the issue raised by the Complainant on merits and in accordance with law. The Sessions Court by its Order dated 17-1-2004 allowed the Criminal Revision filed by the complainant and set aside the Judgment and Order passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Ponda. The Applicants are challenging the said order passed by the Sessions Court in Criminal Revision application No. 68/2000.

(3.) From the perusal of the application which is filed by the Applicants in the trial court, it can be seen that no details have been given in the said application not any material was supplied in support of the said application. The Sessions Court has allowed the said application and one of the ground on which the said application was allowed is that particulars have not been mentioned by the Applicants in their application under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which was filed before the Judicial magistrate, First Class, Ponda.