RABINDRA NATH PANDEY @ MUNNA S/O SRI SACHIDANAND PANDEY Vs. KOSHLESH PANDEY SON OF LATE JAISHREE PANDEY AND THE STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is an accused in Complaint Case No. 458(C) of 1998, corresponding to Tr. No. 646 of 1999 for offences under Sections 341, 323, 427 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code, had initially challenged the order taking cognizance dated 7.8 1999 passed by Miss. Priti Verma, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Buxar by way of filing a revision vide Cr.Revision No. 145 of 1999/13 of 2002. After filing of Revision petition, it appears from the order dated 18.7.2002, the petitioner (accused) did not take any step to press the petition and the case was adjourned on several dates. However, finally by the order dated 18.7.2002, the learned 1st Addl.Sessions Judge, Buxar, dismissed the said revision. The revisional order was passed on 18.7.2002, but the petitioner again did not take any immediate step and after expiry of more than 1 1/2 years, he approached this Court by way of invoking its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. By the order dated 5.7.2004, further proceeding in Complaint Case No. 458(C) of 1998 was ordered to remain stayed.

(2.) I have examined both the impugned orders, i.e. the order dated 7.8.1999, whereby the learned Magistrate had taken cognizance of offence and also the order dated 18.7.2002, whereby the learned Addl.Sessions Judge after examining the matter rejected the revision petition No. 145 of 1999 , which was preferred by this petitioner.

(3.) I do not find any error in either of the orders. There is no merit in the present petition. Accordingly the petition stands rejected.