Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

AMOL SINGH versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Amol Singh v. State Of U.P. And Others - APPLICATION U/s 482 No. 9910 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 8511 (7 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).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

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 5.4.2006 passed by Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Firozabad in Misc. case No. 800 of 2006 whereby the application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. has been treated as a complaint and the order dated 17.4.2007 passed by Addl. Distirict Judge/ FTC 3, Firozabad whereby the criminal revision No. 49 of 2006 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 orders are illegal which are liable to be set aside.

It is opposed by learned A.G.A. by submitting that both the orders are well reasoned orders.

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. The same error is also committed by the learned revisional court by dismissing the revision.  Therefore, the impugned orders are 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.

7.5.2007

RPD/9910/07


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.