Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SMT. KALPANA AGRAWAL versus STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Smt. Kalpana Agrawal v. State Of U.P. & Others - CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. 2548 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 3442 (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).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

COURT NO.51

CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT  PETITION NO. 2548 OF 2007

Smt. Kalpana Agrawal....................................Petitioner.

                                         Versus

State of U.P and others................................Respondents.

Hon. Mrs. Poonam Srivastav, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State.

The petitioner is aggrieved by an order of the Magistrate rejecting the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. preferred by him. The order of the Magistrate dated 19.9.2006 was confirmed by the revisional court vide order dated 28.11.2006 in criminal revision no. 277 of 2006. Both the orders are impugned in the instant writ petition.

Submission on behalf of the petitioner is that the Magistrate and revisional court started assessing correctness of evidence while refusing to direct the police to register and investigate the matter, the courts below were not entitled to do so. The limited jurisdiction of the Magistrate is to assess as to whether a cognizable offence is made out or not?

There are various decisions of the Courts in the cases of Bahadur Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another 2005 (2) ACR page 1241, Ram Kumar Gautam Vs. State of U.P. and others 2006 (55) ACC 763, Sukhveer Singh Vs. State of U.P. 2006 (55) ACC 889, Govind and others Vs. State of U.P. and others 2003 Current Bail Cases page 934 (D.B.), where it has been ruled that it is responsibility of the Magistrate to direct the police to follow the mandate of law whenever the Magistrate is approached by an aggrieved person with a prayer that the police has refused to register the F.I.R. in a cognizable offence, and the Magistrate is required to look into such a prayer with a view to determine whether any cognizable offence is disclosed or not? if it does, he has no option but to direct the police to register and investigate the matter.

In view of the principles laid down by the various Courts, I set aside the impugned orders dated 19.9.2009 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Badaun, and 28.11.2006 passed by Sessions Judge, Badaun. The matter is remanded to the Magistrate to examine it afresh and pass appropriate orders whether a cognizable offence appears to have been committed or not?

With the aforesaid direction, writ petition is finally disposed of.

Dt.28.2.2007

rkg


Copyright

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

Advertisement

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 |

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