BAHADUR SINGH Vs. RAMCHARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure (for short "the Code") has been filed against order dated 08/01/2015, passed by IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Shajapur in Criminal Revision No. 133/2014, whereby directed the Magistrate to take the cognizance against the petitioner for the offence mentioned in the complaint.

(2.) Brief facts of this case are that the respondent/complainant has filed a complaint against the petitioner for the offence under Sections 390,392,394,327 & 166 of IPC and under Section 3(2)(v) and (vii) of SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act). After considering the statements of the complainant and the witnesses and the result of investigation the Magistrate found that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding, therefore, vide order dated 13/05/2014 dismissed the complaint. Against this order the respondent has filed the revision under Section 397/401 of the Code, learned IInd ASJ, Shajapur by the impugned order allowed the revision and directed the Magistrate that there is prima facie ground for taking cognizance against the petitioner for the offence mentioned in the complaint. Being aggrieved with this order this petition has been filed.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner assailed the impugned order on two grounds that the Revisional Court should not have set-aside the order lightly, unless order passed by the Magistrate entail mis-carriage of justice or perverse or un-reasonable. For this purpose, he placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in the case of Rajaram Gupta v. Dharamchand, 1983 CrLJ 612. Second ground is that, while exercising the power under Section 398 of the "Code", the Revisional Court at the most can remand the case back for further inquiry but Revisional Court has no jurisdiction to direct the Magistrate for taking congnizance of particular offence. For this purpose he placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in the case of J.D. Singh v. State of M.P., 1990 MPLJ 39 & Rewaram v. State of M.P., 2004 4 MPLJ 351.