Mohammad Asad @ Mohammad ... vs State Of U.P.
2012 Latest Caselaw 2090 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 12
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 91 of 2003
 

 
Petitioner :- Mohammad Asad @ Mohammad Asaduddin
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
 
Petitioner Counsel :- Shafiq Mirza
 
Respondent Counsel :- Govt.Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Ravindra Singh,J.

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P.

This revision has been filed against the   order dated 18.11.2002 passed by learned V- Addl. Civil Judge (Jr.Div.)/ J.M. Sultanpur in case No. 2790 of 2002 whereby the final report has been rejected and the applicant  has been summoned to face the trial under section 498-A IPC and section 3/4 D.P. Act.

From the perusal of the record it appears that it is too old revision in which no interim order staying the operation of the order dated 18.11.2002 has been passed and the lower court record has been received as reported by the office.

It is contended by learned counsel for the revisionist that in the present case the learned Magistrate concerned has rejected the final report after considering the statement of the first informant recorded as C.W. 1. The learned Magistrate concerned has adopted a mixed procedure in taking the cognizance, the  cognizance has been taken by learned Magistrate concerned after perusing the case diary and statement of C.W.1, Therefore, the impugned order dated 18.11.2002 is illegal.

In reply of the above contention, it is submitted by learned A.G.A. that learned Magistrate concerned has not committed any error in passing the impugned order.

Considering the facts, circumstances of the case, submission made by learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A. it appears that the order dated 18.11.2002 has been passed by learned Magistrate concerned after considering the statement of C.W. 1  as well as perusing the case diary. The learned Magistrate concerned has adopted a mixed procedure in taking the cognizance. The procedure adopted by learned Magistrate concerned is not proper, therefore, the impugned order dated 18.11.2002 is illegal and the same is hereby set aside in case the trial court has not proceeded further and the statement of the witnesses have not been recorded, therefore, it is directed that learned Magistrate concerned shall pass a fresh order after affording opportunity of being heard to the first informant of this court in accordance with law. The lower court  record received shall be sent back to the court concerned within 30 days from today.

Accordingly this revision is allowed.

Order Date :- 23.5.2012/RPD