MOHD ABU KAZI Vs. ANANDRAO SAKHARAM JADHAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this Application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the said Code of 1973), the Petitioner has taken exception to the order dated 21st November 2005 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Karad below Application at Exh.76 in Regular Criminal Case No.2968 of 1998. A Revision Application under section 397 of the said Code preferred by the Applicants for challenging the said order before the Sessions Court has been rejected.

(2.) THE Applicants are being prosecuted at the instance of the second Respondent-State for offences punishable under sections 52 and 53 of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1966. A complaint was lodged at the instance of Karad Municipal Council with the second Respondent alleging commission of offences under section 52 and 53 of the said Act of 1966 by the Applicants. An application was made by the first Respondent before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class seeking permission to engage an Advocate to represent him. The first Respondent is the prosecution witness No.6 in the said case. The said application made by the first Respondent at Exh.76 was allowed by the learned Trial Judge by the order dated 21st November 2005 which is impugned in this Application. As stated earlier, Revision Application filed by the Applicants has been rejected by the Sessions Court.

(3.) I have considered the submissions. It appears that on behalf of Karad Municipal Council, one Shri Dilip Dixit an Inspector lodged a complaint on 12th May 1996 with Karad City Police Station alleging commission of offence as regards unauthorised construction carried out on the plot in question. On the basis of the said complaint filed at the instance of Karad Municipal Council, investigation was carried out and a charge sheet was filed on 30th September 1998. It is an admitted position that the first Respondent has been cited as a prosecution witness. Thus, the complainant in the case is the Karad Municipal Council. It may be true that on the basis of various complaints filed by the first Respondent with the Karad Municipal Council, the said Council has acted upon by lodging the complaint with the police. It appears that the first Respondent all along complained about the unauthorised constructions allegedly carried out by the Applicants.