HIRAMATI Vs. RAM PRASAD SONI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) REVERSAL of the order of framing charge by the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Raigarh in exercise of revisional jurisdiction has compelled the complainant to approach this Court.

(2.) AS the fact situation has been unfurled, the applicant as complainant instituted complaint No. 10/87 against the non-applicants Nos. 1 to 4 for offences Under Sections 380, 392, 379, 454 and 504 (B) of Indian Penal Code on the allegation that on 9-11-1985 the accused persons broke open the lock of the door of the dwelling house of the complainant and committed theft by taking various articles such as utensils, Paddy oil, one 'tola' gold and Rs. 500/ -. The matter was reported at the Police Station, but as no action was taken by the Police authorities the present revisionist was constrained to approach the Court Under Section 200 of Criminal Procedure Code, and the proceedings continued on the basis of the materials brought on record. Learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raigarh framed charge against the accused persons, non-applicants Nos. 1 to 4 herein, for offences Under Sections 454 and 480, Indian Penal Code by order dated 6-8-1991. The legality of the said order was called in question in revision wherein the accused persons became successful in their assailment which is the cause of grievance of the present petitioner.

(3.) MR. Prashant Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the revisional court has travelled beyond the scope in the revision inasmuch as he has weighed the probability of the evidence and there has been meticulous and threadbare analysis and scanning of the evidence which is not permissible while dealing with a matter of this nature, and such transgression vitiates the order. In spite of valid notice there has been no appearance on behalf of the non-applicants Nos. 1 to 4.