MURARI LAL Vs. K C ANEJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An interesting question of law has been raised in this revision petition.

(2.) The petitioner Murari Lal filed a private complaint in the court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bharatpur, under sections 332, 353, 324 and 504 Indian Penal Code against the non-petitioner Capt. K.C. Aneja. The learned Magistrate after preliminary inquiry found the case under sections 323, 324 and 504 Indian Penal Code prima facie established against the accused and took cognizance under those offences. The accused appeared before the learned Magistrate in pursuance to summons issued to him after the cognizance having been taken by the learned Magistrate. The trial in the case was proceeded with as a warrant case instituted otherwise than on police report.

(3.) The learned Magistrate recorded the statement of the complainant Murari Lal and in the meantime the Chief Ordinance Officer, C.D.O. Amunition Depol, Bharatpur sent a letter No. 2100/l/X/HQ dated 18th April, 1980, making a request for handing over the accused for being tried by court martial. The request made by the Chief Ordnance Officer was opposed by the complainant mainly on the ground that a cross-case lodged by Aneja against the complainant petitioner Murari Lal was pending trial before the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bharatpur and as such the present case which had arisen out of the same occurrence and was a cross-case should have been tried also by the same Court and not by the proceedings under the Army Act. The learned Magistrate took the view that in view of the provisions contained In Section 475, Criminal Procedure Code read with the provisions of Criminal Courts and Court Martial (Adjustment of Jurisdiction) Rules, 1952 and Section 125 of the Army Act, his jurisdiction his come to an end and he was bound to send the accused for being tried by Court Martial when such request is made by the Commanding Authority of the Amunition Depot. In this view of the matter, the learned Magistrate rejected the objection raised by the complainant and directed that the accused may be handed over for trial to the Commanding Authority and statement of the offence and the relevant papers may also be sent along With the accused. Aggrieved against this order the complainant has filed this revision before this Court.