Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Jai Hind Rawat, Sub Inspector Of Police v. State Of U.P. & Another - CRIMINAL REVISION No. 1522 of 2000 [2007] RD-AH 3393 (28 February 2007)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


Hon. Vijay Kumar Verma,J.

By means of this revision preferred under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. order dated 19.07.2000, passed by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar in Crime No. 122 of 1999 (State Vs. Jai Hind Rawat), under Section 302/188/120-B/201 /328 IPC and 3(2)(5) S.C. S.T. Act, P.S. Nawab Ganj, Kanpur Nagar has been challenged. By the impugned order the application dated 19.07.2000 to reject prosecution sanction  moved by the accused Jai Hind Rawat has been rejected.

Heard arguments of Sri R.B. Sahai, learned counsel for the revisionist and learned AGA Sri R.K. Singh and perused the record.

From the record, it transpires that during the course of investigation of case  crime No. 122 of 1999, sanction to prosecute the revisionist-accused was obtained by the Investigation Officer from DIG Kanpur Nagar. An application was moved on 19.07.2000 on behalf of accused to reject that sanction. The said application has been rejected by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar vide impugned order, which has been challenged in this revision.

I have carefully gone through the impugned order and the contents of the application moved on 19.07.2000 on behalf of accused to reject the sanction. In my view, no illegality has been committed by the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Kanpur Nagar in passing the impugned order, because the Magistrate has no right to interfere in the investigation. The matter of legality of the sanction may be raised by the accused during trial at the time of charge, and hence on this ground, this Court will not be justified in making any interference in the impugned order, which is wholly legal and justified.

In the result, the revision is hereby dismissed.

Office to send a copy of this order to Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Kanpur Nagar for information.

Dt. 28.02.2007

v.k.updh. Crl. Rev. no. 1522/2000


Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.