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


Kedar Nath Pandey v. State Of U.P. & Others - APPLICATION U/s 482 No. 9684 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 8389 (4 May 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. Ravindra Singh, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the order dated 3.2.2007 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi  whereby the application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. has been rejected and the order dated 3.4.2007 passed by Addl.Sessions Judge/ Special Judge, Varanasi whereby the criminal revision No. 65 of 2007 filed by the applicant has been dismissed.  It is further contended that the impugned orders are illegal which have not been decided under the provisions of law because on the basis of the allegation made in the application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. a prima facie cognizable offence  is made out but the same has not been considered  by the courts below. The impugned order is illegal which is liable to be set aside. It is opposed by learned A.G.A. by submitting that the order is well reasoned order. From the perusal of the application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. it appears that on the basis of allegation made therein prima facie offence is made out. In such circumstances learned Magistrate was under obligation to direct the Officer Incharge to investigate the same, but not passing such order, learned Magistrate has committed manifest error. Therefore, the impugned order is illegal and hereby set aside. However, it is directed that  the learned Magistrate concerned  shall  pass a fresh order on the application filed by the applicant under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. in accordance with provisions of law.

With this direction, this application is finally disposed of.




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.