Court No. - 34
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1043 of 1995 Revisionist :- Yogendra Singh And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Revisionist :- H.M. Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J.
1. Heard Sri H.M. Srivastava, learned counsel for revisionists and learned AGA for State of U.P.
2. This criminal revision under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C., has been filed against order dated 24.08.1995 passed by Sri V.P. Govil, Special Judge/ Vth Additional District Judge, Mainpuri in Special Trial No. 77 of 1993, rejecting prayer of revisionists for remitting the case back to Magistrate, Ist class as no charge under Section 394 IPC is made out against revisionists.
3. It is contended that complainant himself stated in the FIR that register and receipt book were lost and the said fact was reiterated in his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C.. In a subsequent statement, complainant improved his earlier statement and said that register was looted by accused and thereupon Section 394 IPC has been added. Concerned Magistrate has not examined the matter that FIR and statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. clearly said that register and receipt book were misplaced, therefore, no offence under Section 394 IPC is made out.
4. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case as also the fact that FIR as well as statement of complainant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was initially recorded by police, therefore, in my view, relying on the improved statement which is apparent from the perusal of said statement, implication of revisionist under Section 394 IPC is not valid and shows non application of mind.
5. Accordingly, revision is allowed. Impugned order dated 24.08.1995, in so far as implication of revisionist under Section 394 IPC, is hereby set aside.
6. Certify this judgment to the lower Court immediately.
Order Date :- 22.8.2019 Siddhant Sahu