R L JATAV Vs. STATION HOUSE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Revisional powers of this Court u/s. 397 r/w Sec. 401 Cr.P.C are invoked for assailing the observations made by learned Trial Judge from paragraph 105 to 108 of the judgment dated 30.06.2017 in S.T. No. 09/2012 P.C. Act (EWO) passed by1st ASJ, Special Court P.C. Act Morena whereby the trial court has found the prima facie offence to be established against the petitioner R.L. Jatav who appeared as PW-9 in the said trial and has directed the D.G., State Economic Offence Bureau to register an offence against the petitioner and file final report u/s 173 Cr.P.C within a period of four months with the corresponding direction to the D.G. to file appropriate application before the competent authority to seek sanction for prosecution against the petitioner.

(2.) Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard on the question of admission.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner by relying upon the decisions of the Apex Court in the case of Ramlal Narang Vs. State (Delhi Administration), (1979) 2 SCC 322, Vinay Tyagi Vs. Irshad Ali, (2013) 5 SCC 762, Anil Kumar and Ors. Vs. M.K. Aiyappa and Anr., (2013) 10 SCC 705 and Bharti Tamang Vs. Union of India and Ors., (2013) 15 SCC 578 & Chandra Babu Vs. State Through Inspector of Police, (2015) 8 SCC 774 submits that the trial court had no jurisdiction to issue direction which tantamounts to encroaching upon the rights of the investigating agency and thus is abhorrent to the scheme of Cr.P.C. It is thus contended that the trial court has usurped the power and authority of investigating agency and thereby committed a jurisdictional error.