RAJENDRA TURI Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Anurag Kashyap, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. V.K. Gupta, learned A.P.P. for the State. No one appears on behalf of the opposite party no. 2.

(2.) In this application petitioners have prayed for quashing of order dated 21.05.2015 passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Sahibganj in Criminal Revision No. 77 of 2014 by which the revision application preferred against the order dated 20.06.2014 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Sahibganj, in connection with Borio (Jirwabari) P.S. Case No. 38 of 2014 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 82 of 2014 has been rejected.

(3.) It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the investigation into the offence under section 3/4 of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, was carried out by the Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police, Borio (Jirwabari) Police Station who is not authorised to carry out investigation under the provision of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. It has been submitted that even otherwise no offence under the provision of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been made out against the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this fact has not been taken into consideration either by the learned S.D.J.M., Sahibganj while taking cognizance or by the Revisional Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that so far as taking of cognizance under section 341, 323, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code is concerned the First Information report does not reveal any such offence which has been committed by the petitioners. It has also been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have been implicated on account of land dispute.