Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

NARAYAN DAS & TOHERS versus STATE OF U.P. & ANOTHER

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Narayan Das & Tohers v. State Of U.P. & Another - CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. 13433 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 18974 (9 November 2006)

 

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. 45

CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT  PETITION NO. 13433 OF 2006

Narayan Das and others...................................Petitioners.

                                         Versus

State of U.P and another...............................Respondents.

Hon. Mrs. Poonam Srivastav, J.

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

On the basis of a complaint, the petitioners have been summoned under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate vide order dated 18.7.2005.  A criminal revision no. 209 of 2005 was preferred, and the same has been dismissed on the question of maintainability without giving any finding on merit in view of the decisions of the Apex Court Adalat Prasad Vs. Roop Lal Jindal and others, 2004 (50), A.C.C.,924, Subrahamanayam Seth Raman Vs. State of Maharashtra and others 2004 A.I.R. page 860.

I am not in agreement with the conclusion of the Additional Sessions Judge, since the Apex Court has held that the Magistrate cannot review his own summoning order even if such an objection is filed by the accused against the summoning order.  The Magistrate cannot exercise power of review but it is nowhere said that the summoning order cannot be challenged in a superior court by way of revision. The filing of the revision under the provision of the Code does not amount to review, therefore, order of the Additional Sessions Judge, court no. 9, Moradabad dated 31.8.2006 is set aside.  The matter is remanded.  The revisional court is directed to decide the revision on merit without raising objection in respect of maintainability of the revision within a period of three weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him.

With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is finally disposed off.

Dt. 9.11.2006

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.