Court No. - 73
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1045 of 2019 Revisionist :- Dafedar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 7 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Rajesh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Narendra Kumar Maurya
Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.
Counter affidavit filed on behalf of opposite parties no. 2 to 8 is taken on record. Learned counsel for the revisionist does not wish to file any rejoinder affidavit.
This criminal revision is directed against the order dated 29.9.2018 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Mainpuri in criminal misc. application no. 227 of 2018 (Dafedar Vs. Mushtaq Khan and others) whereby the application moved by the revisionist under section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. was rejected.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel for the opposite parties no.2 to 8 and learned A.G.A. for the State.
Submission of learned counsel for the revisionist is that application under section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. was illegally rejected on insufficient grounds. A cognizable offence was made out. Neither the court below passed order for registration of the F.I.R. nor treated the application under section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. as complaint, thus committed illegality.
Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 argued that observation recorded by the Magistrate concerned in the order dated 31.9.2018 is in accordance with law. Revisionist has opportunity to move complaint.
In this matter, as is evident from the record, on filing of the application under section 156 (3) Cr.P.C., report was called for from the concerned police station. Concerned Magistrate also called the revisionist and thereafter vide order dated 29.9.2018 rejected the application under section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. raising doubt about the medical evidence. No illegality is found in the impugned order. Revisionist has opportunity to file a complaint. Rejection of the application under section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. is no bar in filing the complaint under Chapter XV of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Revision, being devoid of merit, is accordingly dismissed.
However, if the revisionist so desires, he may file the complaint before the Magistrate concerned and it is expected that the same shall be entertained by the Magistrate concerned in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 22.8.2019 / ss