SUKHVINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is against the order dated 19.8.1997 by which the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dabwali, issued process against the accused for offence under Section 182 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) AS such in my opinion, the Revision should have been filed in the Sessions Court instead of High Court. In my opinion, if two Courts having different hierarchy hold concurrent jurisdiction, it is always desirable that the litigatant should prefer the Court at lower hierarchy. The concurrent jurisdiction of two Courts at different hierarchy is conferred under Section 399 for the reasons that in certain circumstances, the High Court would also be in a position to entertain the revision before the Sessions Court would not be adequate remedy. However, since this Court has already taken cognizance of this case by issuing a notice to the A.G. Haryana, I propose to dispose of this revision petition on merits.

(3.) AFTER acquittal of the accused, the police has moved the Magistrate under Section 182 of the Indian Penal Code on the allegations that the said Sukhwinder Singh by filing the false complaint, has made the police to use their lawful authorities for investigation of a case which turned out to be based on false allegations.