HASIMUDDIN MONDAL Vs. GOLAM MAHEBUB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revisional application is directed against the Judgment and order dated the 11th May 1981 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, First Court, Murshidabad, while exercising his power of revision in connection with a case under Sections 447/147/427 of the IPC. The accused opposite parties Nos. 1 to 9 were charge-sheeted on the aforesaid penal sections and they were facing a trial before the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Lalbag, in G. R. Case No. 382 of 1973. The learned Magistrate was pleased to pass an order of acquittal in connection with that case. Being aggrieved thereby the complainant, Hasimuddin Mondal, the present petitioner, filed a revisional application before the learned Sessions Judge. The Additional Sessions Judge who heard the matter dismissed the application on the ground that under S. 378 of the Criminal Procedure Code the aggrieved de facto complainant had a right to move the Hon'ble High Court in appeal against that order of acquittal and as such the Sessions Judge was not competent himself to deal with the matter.

(2.) Mr. Mihir Kumar Roy, learned Advocate appearing for the de facto complainant petitioner, Hasimuddin Mondal invites my attention to Section 399 of the Criminal Procedure Code which lays down inter alia.

(3.) On more occasions than one I enquired before Mr. Barindra Nath Roy appearing for the accused opposite parties as to the exact provision in the Criminal Procedure Code which disentitles the learned Sessions Judge from hearing a revisional matter against an order of acquittal on merits. Mr. Barindra Nath Roy has frankly and candidly said that although he has taken great pains in finding out the exact provision, he has failed in his attempt to do so. Mr. Barindra Nath Roy however contends that where an appeal lies before this Hon'ble Court, the aggrieved party ought not to have been allowed to move the Sessions Judge in revision. With respect to Mr. Ray I must say that this contention does not hold good in view of the facts and circumstances of the case.