RATAN LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal misc. petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. against the orders dated 4.2.2008 and 10.4.2008 passed by Judicial Magistrate Sambhar Lake, District Jaipur. Vide order dated 4.2.2008 the Judicial Magistrate forwarded the complaint under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. to the police for investigation and vide order dated 10.4.2008 dismissed the application dated 18.3.2008 moved by the petitioner for reviewing the order dated 4.2.2008 and for calling back the complaint from the police and to take cognizance of offence against the accused persons named in the complaint. On 28.2.2003 the complainant petitioner Ratan Lal along with other complainant Rajendra Singh son of Gulab Singh filed a criminal complaint under Section 190 Cr.P.C. in the court of Judicial Magistrate Sambhar Lake against the accused persons namely Rajendra Singh, SHO Police Station Phulera and Mukesh Yadav, Constable, Police Station Phulera for offence under Sections 166, 219, 330, 323 and 341 IPC with regard to an incident taken place on 27.2.2003. After registration of complaint on 22.4.2003 the trial Court recorded the statements of the complainant and his witnesses under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. i.e. P.W. 1 Dr. Mahesh Kumar Verma, P.W. 2 Ratan son of Pema Ram and P.W. 3 Rajendra son of Gulab and also recorded the statement of Shiv Ram son of Nand Lal as P.W. 4 on 20.6.2003. In his statement Dr. Mahesh Kumar Verma has stated that the petitioner has sustained grievous injuries and from the statement of the complainant and his witnesses prima facie the offence under Sections 166, 167, 219, 330, 323, 341 and 325 IPC is made out against the accused persons and there is sufficient evidence available on record to take cognizance of offence against the accused persons for above mentioned offences but the trial Court vide order dated 4.2.2008 sent the matter to the Deputy Superintendent of Police Sambhar Lake for investigation. The complainant on 18.3.2008 moved an application stating therein that vide order dated 4.2.2008 the trial Court has sent the matter to the Deputy Superintendent of Police Sambhar Lake for detailed investigation while the trial Court has already recorded the statements of the complainant and of his witnesses under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. The learned counsel for the complainant petitioner in support of his arguments cited the case of Bhushan Prakash @ Prasad vs. State and Others, 2006 4 RajLW 3415.

(2.) Mr. Peeyush Kumar, Public Prosecutor appearing for the State has argued that the Magistrate has rightly sent the complaint to the police for further investigation and in sending the complaint he has not committed any error so as to call for interference by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate after recording the statement of the complainant under Sections 20 and 202 Cr.P.C. sent the matter to the Deputy Superintendent of Police for further investigation.