SUSHIL KUMAR Vs. STATE AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition was filed by accused-petitioner Sushil Kumar against the order 27.12003 passed by the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vallabh Nagar, District Udaipur in Criminal Case No. 17/2003 whereby the learned Magistrate had taken cognizance against the petitioner for the offence under Section 379 IPC. The petitioner has unnecessary kept this matter pending in this court for a long time only because proceedings of the lower court had been stayed by order dated 25.4.2003 of this Court and as it is usual practice, once the stay is obtained, the party in whose favour stay is granted, never appears to argued the matter on merits.

(2.) A revision against the order of a Magistrate may be filed directly in the High Court also but the propriety requires that the aggrieved party should first go to the inferior court, i.e. Sessions Court, otherwise this Court will be flooded with so many cases to do the job of Sessions Judge only. In my view when the two forums are available then necessarily it is a matter of propriety for the aggrieved party to first approach the lower forum, except in rare and special circumstances. By doing this, party seeking order from the Magistrate will get double remedy, First, he may approach the court of Sessions in revision and then, if legally permissible, under Sec. 482, Cr.P.C. before the High Court. In the present case, no special and exceptional reasons have been assigned by the accused-petitioner for filing this revision petition directly in this Court.

(3.) Following rulings may be referred here in support of my view:-