GULAM ALI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question referred to the larger Bench was whether this Court should also set up a practice for future not to entertain the revision petitions directly from the orders of the Magistrates unless some extraordinary or exceptional circumstances have been shown by the party coming in revision directly against the order of the Magistrate.

(2.) GHULAM Ali had filed the revision petition under Section 435, Criminal Procedure Code, direct to the High Court by-passing the Sessions Court which has got the concurrent jurisdiction with the High Court in matter of revision against the orders of the inferior Courts. The facts of the case have been stated in my order, dated 8th April. 1971. and need not be set out in detail.

(3.) THERE was a dispute with regard to the possession of the land between Ghulam Ali and Jagdish Kumar, who alleged himself to be the owner in possession of the land by virtue of a purchase made by him from Maharani of Sirmur. Proceedings under Section 145. Criminal Procedure Code, were initiated on the police report and the learned Magistrate found that Jagdish Kumar, the owner of the land, was in possession and that Ghulam Ali was not in possession and he. therefore, passed the order, which was assailed by a revision petition. A preliminary objection was raised in the revision petition which was heard by me sitting singly, that the revision having been filed directly to the High Court by-passing the Court of Session was not maintainable. He should have first approached the Sessions Judge and if he were unsuccessful then he should have moved this Court.