Court No. - 28
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3837 of 2008 Applicant :- Khajan Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Others Counsel for Applicant :- R.P. Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Case called out in revised list. No one appears on behalf of applicant to press this application. Learned A.G.A. is present.
Perusal of record shows that applicant Khajan Singh is aggrieved by order dated 26.11.2007 passed by Special Judge, (D.A.A.) Agra, whereby final report submitted by police in Case Crime No. 151 of 2007, under Sections 394, 395, 452, 427 IPC, Police Station Pinahat, District Agra has been accepted and further against order dated 6.12.2007, whereby complaint filed by applicant has been rejected by Court below under Section 203 Cr. P. C.
It transpires from record that applicant lodged an F.I.R. dated 2.5.2007 which was registered as Case Crime No. 151 of 2007 under Sections 394, 395, 452, 427 IPC, Police Station Pinahat, District Agra. Police upon completion of statutory investigation of aforesaid case crime number submitted final report no. 6/07. Aforesaid final report submitted by police was accepted by Court below, vide order dated 26.11.2007. On the same day, the applicant filed an application stating therein that 25.11.2207 was Sunday and i.e. how the matter has been taken up on the next day i.e. 26.11.2007. Applicant was present in Court and wants to file protest petition. Court below allowed the aforesaid application. Consequently, applicant filed protest petition dated 27.11.2007. Court below proceeded with the aforesaid protest petition as a complaint and proceeded to record statement of applicant under Section 200 Cr. P. C. and of his witnesses under Section 202 Cr. P. C. Upon completion of aforesaid exercise, Court below passed impugned order dated 6.12.2007 rejecting the complaint under Section 203 Cr. P. C.
I have perused the impugned order dated 6.12.2007. Court below upon consideration of entire material on record has recorded that prima facie there is no evidence of alleged dacoity that is alleged to have been committed in house of applicant. No resident of the house has been adduced to explain the same.
P.W. 1 Yashpal Singh is a resident of village and he could not have witnessed the alleged act of loot of Rs.1,90,000/- which admittedly was kept inside the house.
In view of aforesaid finding, Court below did not commit any illegality in rejecting the complaint. Consequently, present application fails and is hereby dismissed.
Order Date :- 26.11.2019 HSM