NANDKUMAR S KALE Vs. BHAURAO CHANDRESBHANJI TIDKE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Returnable forthwith. Heard finally with consent of parties.

(2.) This is a revision by an accused. A few facts may be stated thus : the applicant is a police officer. At the relevant time he was working as in-charge of the Police Station Civil Lines, Akola. On 2-12-1996 the non applicant no. 1 had lodged a report with the police station Civil Lines, Akola. He had alleged that his daughter-in-law along with her relative had committed robbery, trespass and theft. The police refused to take cognizance of the said complaint of bhaurao i. e. non-applicant No. 1. Non-applicant No. 1, therefore, filed criminal complaint case bearing No. 1280/01 in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First class. The Judicial Magistrate First Class in the said criminal complaint passed an order under section 156 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code and directed the police to investigate into the matter. On this an offence was registered by the police. Initially the offence was investigated by P. S. I. Aney and later since the offence is of a serious nature the investigation was taken over by the present applicant. The present applicant filed an application under section 169 Criminal procedure Code before the Magistrate after the investigation and prayed for discharge of the accused therein. The present applicant also filed a summary before the Judicial Magistrate. Judicial Magistrate First Class did not accept the summary and issued a process against the accused named in that complaint case. It is after that order was passed that Bhaurao the present non-applicant No. 1 instituted a criminal complaint against the present applicant under section 468, 471 and 218 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) In the said complaint case the present applicant filed an application to dismiss the complaint. The said application was dismissed on the ground that no sanction was obtained by the complainant to prosecute the present applicant. The magistrate after hearing the parties dismissed the complaint on the ground that sanction was not obtained and the complaint was barred by limitation under section 161 of the Bombay Police Act. The present non-applicant No. 1 therefore preferred a revision before the Sessions Judge. The revision was allowed and the matter was remanded back to the Magistrate with a direction that he will deal with the question of sanction under section 197, Criminal Procedure Code and section 161 of the Bombay Police Act after recording the evidence before charge and on hearing both the sides. Being aggrieved by that order the accused/applicant has preferred this revision.