Smt. Alisha Khan vs State Of U.P. And 5 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 7901 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 67
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1982 of 2022
 

 
Revisionist :- Smt. Alisha Khan
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
 
Counsel for Revisionist :- Shashank Tripathi
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A.

By means of the present criminal revision, the revisionist is assailing the legality and validity of the order dated 20.04.2022 whereby learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar has rejected the application under section 323 Cr.P.C. moved by the informant-Alisha Khan.

I have perused the order impugned and after perusal of the impugned order, it seems that learned Magistrate has rejected the application under section 323 Cr.P.C. as a premature one without dwelling into a single word upon the merit of the case.

From the impugned order, it is evident that the learned Magistrate has opined that only after recording the examination-in-chief of PW-1, the application under section 323 Cr.P.C. was moved.

I have perused the order under challenge and the application. Section 323 Cr.P.C. reads thus :-

"Procedure when, after Commencement of inquiry or trial, Magistrate finds case should be committed. If, in any inquiry into an offence or a trial before a Magistrate, it appears to him at any stage of the proceedings before signing judgment that the case is one which ought to be tried by the Court of Session, he shall commit it to that Court under the provisions hereinbefore contained and thereupon the provisions of Chapter XVIII shall apply to the commitment so made]."

True that the sections speaks about "at any stage of proceedings" but to form a concrete opinion, the concerned Magistrate must arm with substantial material on record so as to form his considered opinion for committing the case before the court of sessions. It is not prudent on the part of the Magistrate, that he should form his opinion on the half backed material or piecemeal material and immediately thereafter jump to some erroneous conclusion.

This is a premature stage to decide the application moved under section 323 Cr.P.C..

At this stage, I do not find any good ground to exercise my power in favour of the revisionist nor see any illegality in the reasoning while passing the impugned order.

If an application, at the appropriate stage, is moved, the same shall be heard and decided strictly in accordance with law after hearing public prosecutor by a well reasoned order.

At the outset, learned counsel for the revisionist submits that the matter is pending since the year 2015 and even after lapse of more than seven years, the trial Court is proceeded with snail's speed.

Hence, it is expected from the learned trial Court to gear up the matter and make necessary endeavour to conclude the trial as early as possible.

It is always open for the revisionist to move a fresh application under section 323 Cr.P.C. at the appropriate stage after collecting sufficient material during trial.

With the aforesaid observations, the present revision stands disposed of.

Order Date :- 25.7.2022

Sumit S