1. Sri Zubair Hasan, Advocate, appearing for Sri Syed Shabih Haider, learned counsel for the petitioner, has vehemently argued that on information being given by the petitioner (Rajendra Kumar alias Khairati Lal) a case was lodged in Police Station Hanumangarh Town in Rajasthan. Hiralal S/o Srinath was prosecuted. After conclusion of trial, the said Hiralal was acquitted of the offence vide judgment dated 4.3.2011 (Annexure-10). Perusal of the document (Annexure-10) indicates that it relates to an incident of 18.2.2009, which related to the murder of Jialal, an employee working in Brick Kiln of the petitioner.
2. Learned counsel contends that in total abuse of process of the Court and process of the law, impugned complaint has been lodged before the Magistrate, Salon, District Rae Bareli, in regard to the same incident. Petitioner has been arrayed as an accused and has been summoned to stand trial vide impugned summoning order dated 14.4.2010 in Complaint Case No.3898 of 2010, Vijai Laxmi v. Rakesh Shukla alias Kesh Shukla and another, under Section 364 I.P.C., Police Station Salon District Rae Bareli, pending in the Court of IInd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Court No.12), Rae Bareli.
3. In the contention of learned counsel, once the crime has been investigated and tried, there is no reason to initiate fresh proceedings against the petitioner, who was complainant in the earlier case. It has also been contended that in regard to the incident, trial was conducted in the State of Rajasthan, the Courts in Uttar Pradesh would have no territorial jurisdiction. Apparently, crime was committed within the territorial jurisdiction of State of Rajasthan.
4. Issue notice to respondent no.2, returnable on 29.8.2014.
5. List on 29.8.2014.
6. Further proceedings in Complaint Case No.3898 of 2010, Vijai Laxmi v. Rakesh Shukla alias Kesh Shukla and another, under Section 364 I.P.C., Police Station Salon District Rae Bareli, shall remain stayed till the next date of listing.
Order Date :- 14.7.2014 A.Nigam