LAWS(MPH)-2011-8-132

VIJAYKUMAR JAIN Vs. STATE OF M P

Decided On August 18, 2011
VIJAY KUMAR JAIN Appellant
V/S
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 preferred by the Petitioner/accused is directed against an order dated 9th November 2010 passed in Criminal Case No. 7718/2010, by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gwalior framing thereby charges for commission of offence punishable under Section 9-B of the Explosive Substances Act read with Sections 66/192 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the Petitioner/accused.

(2.) The facts in short, just for the decision of this revision petition are that on 8th May 2010 in front of the gate of J.A. Hospital, on the road of Mandre Ki Mata Gwalior, the checking was made by the Police Squad. During the course of checking, the accused Vallabha @ Balram was found carrying Crackers without valid licence in a Marshal Jeep and the driver was also found not possessing the permit to drive the motor vehicle. The vehicle and the crackers carried illegally were seized and the accused Vallabha @ Balram was arrested on the spot who informed that the crackers were being carried for Petitioner Vijaya Kumar Jain at Karhaiya district Gwalior. Accordingly, on the report the FIR was lodged against accused-persons including the present Petitioner and after investigation the charge-sheet was filed before the criminal court. During trial, the charges as above were framed against the Petitioner/accused, hence this revision before this Court.

(3.) The contention of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner is that the impugned order passed by the trial court is neither legal nor proper. It is submitted that on perusal of the charge-sheet papers and the evidence collected during investigation, No. offence under Section 9-B of the Explosive Substances Act read with Section 66/192 of the Motor Vehicles Act is made out against the accused. It is further pointed out that the statement regarding discovery of facts is not admissible against other accused. In fact, this is a case of No. evidence against the Petitioner. Therefore, it is requested that by allowing the revision petition, the Petitioner/accused be discharged of the alleged charges.