AJITSINGH BABUSINGH Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved by the order dated 21.7.2005 passed below Exh.17 in Special Case (Atrocity) No. 8 of 2004, by Additional Sessions Judge, Kandhar, the applicants original accused preferred this criminal application.

(2.) Brief facts, giving rise to the present criminal application are as follows :-

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicants submits that 2nd Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Nanded in criminal revision application No. 75 of 2003 has observed that since the offence is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the Magistrate has no power to discharge the accused and further observed that learned C.J.M. has no jurisdiction to consider whether the offence under the provisions of Atrocities Act is made out or not. Accordingly, the order of discharge passed by the learned C.J.M. was quashed and set aside. In the said criminal revision No. 75 of 2003 and as per the directives while disposing of the said criminal application, the learned C.J.M. has committed/transferred the case to the Special Court. Learned counsel submits that the Special Court instead of deciding application Exh.17 for discharge, filed by the present applicants accused on its own merits, rejected the said application only on the ground that he is not sitting in appeal to review or revise the order passed by the 2nd Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Nanded in criminal revision No. 75 of 2003. Learned counsel submits that this approach of the Special Court is improper, incorrect and illegal and the matter is thus fit to be remanded for deciding the application Exh.17 afresh.