Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 420 of 2021 Revisionist :- Sudama Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Chandra Bhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Krishna Kumar Yadav
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A. for the State, learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party No. 2 and perused the record.
The instant revision has been preferred by the revisionist against the order dated 03.12.2020 whereby learned Special Judge (SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act), Jaunpur has rejected the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. of the revisionist mainly on the ground that regarding the same incident dated 23.08.2020 first information report has already been registered as Case Crime No. 220 of 2020 at the concerned police station, therefore, there is no occasion for issuing direction to lodge another F.I.R. regarding the same incident dated 23.08.2020.
Assailing the impugned order dated 03.12.2020, learned counsel for the revisionist submits that in the said F.I.R. of Case Crime No. 220 of 2020 opposite party no. 2 is not an accused, therefore, concerned court below has committed legal error in rejecting her application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party no. 2 submit that regarding the same incident dated 23.08.2020 F.I.R. has already been lodged on the same day i.e. on 23.08.2020 by one Mukesh, who is son of the revisionist-Sudama Devi as Case Crime No. 0220 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 302 I.P.C. against ten accused persons, namely, Ram Khelavan, Jialal, Dharmendra, Ninhu, Ram Ashish, Rakesh, Indu, Keshav, Ravindra and Jagarnath at Police Station-Khutahan, District-Jaunpur, in which after investigation charge sheet has already been submitted. Therefore, there was no occasion to move an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. by the revisionist regarding the same incident as the same was not maintainable.
Having heard the argument of learned counsel for the parties, I find force in the submission of learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party no. 2. I do not find any material illegality or irregularity in the impugned order dated 03.12.2020.
Accordingly, the instant revision lacks merit and is hereby dismissed.
Order Date :- 28.10.2021 Sunil Kr. Gupta