Mobile View
Main Search Advanced Search Disclaimer
Cites 14 docs - [View All]
The Indian Penal Code
Section 143 in The Indian Penal Code
Section 427 in The Indian Penal Code
Section 336 in The Indian Penal Code
Arms Act

User Queries
View the actual judgment from court
Jharkhand High Court
Shambhu Singh vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors. on 27 June, 2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

Cr. Revision No. 133 of 2006

Shambhu Singh .... ..... Petitioner Versus

The State of Jharkhand & Others .... ..... Opposite Parties --------

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA

------

For the Petitioner : M/s Prashant Kumar Singh & S. Bakshi, Advs. For the State : A.P.P.

For O.P. Nos. 2 to 6 : Mr. Nagmani Tiwari, Advocate ------

12/ 27.06.2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State as also learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite parties Nos. 2 to 6. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 9.12.2005 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-IV, Deoghar, in S.C. No. 199 of 2005, whereby in an application under Section 227 Cr.P.C., the Court below has found that there was no material for framing charge against the accused-opposite parties nos. 2 to 6 for the offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act and has directed the accused persons to appear in the Court for framing the charge under Sections 143, 336 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code so that in exercise the power under Section 228 Cr.P.C., the case be transferred to the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deoghar, for trial in accordance with law.

The petitioner is the informant in the case and aggrieved by the said order, the present revision has been filed submitting that the impugned order passed by the Court below is absolutely illegal, inasmuch, in the F.I.R. there is direct allegation against the accused-opposite parties Nos. 2 to 6 to have used firearms and there were sufficient materials in the case diary against them for framing charge under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act as well.

From perusal of the record it appears that the opposite parties were made accused in Deoghar P.S. Case No. 141 of 2001 with the allegation that they had surrounded the house of the informant armed with firearms and they had also made firing and pelted stones with intention to cause the death, but it is apparent from the F.I.R. that there was no injury either on the informant or any inmate of the house. It also appears from the impugned order that after investigation, the police had found the case true only for the offence under Sections 143, 336 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code and investigation made by the investigating officer, was also affirmed by two supervising authorities. However, on the order of the -2-

D.I.G. further investigation was made and charge sheet was also submitted for the offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act and on that basis, cognizance was taken against the accused persons and the case was committed to the Court of Session.

In the Court of Session, the accused persons filed application under Section 227 Cr.P.C., for discharge, which was disposed of by the impugned order dated 9.12.2005 passed in S.C. No. 199 of 2005 and the Court below discussing the aforesaid facts and in view of the fact that after investigation, the case was found true only for the offences under Sections 143, 336 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code, which was affirmed by two supervising authorities, and also taking into consideration the material collected during further investigation, directed the accused persons to appear in the Court for framing of the charge only under Sections 143, 336 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code so that in exercise the power under Section 228 Cr.P.C., the case be transferred to the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deoghar, for trial in accordance with law. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned order passed by the learned Court below is absolutely illegal and bad in law, inasmuch, as there were materials in the case diary to show that the offences are made out under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, and accordingly, the Court of Session aught to have proceeded with the trial. Learned counsel for the opposite parties Nos. 2 to 6, on the other hand, has supported the impugned order passed by the Court below. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and upon going through the impugned order, I find that the Court below has passed the impugned order with cogent reasons and has found that after investigation, the case was found true only for the offences under Sections 143, 336 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code, which was affirmed by two supervising authorities, and accordingly, decided to transfer back the case to the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deoghar, for trial in accordance with law. It shall always be open to the petitioner to avail appropriate remedy at the appropriate stage of the trial. I do not find any illegality and/or irregularity in the impugned order passed by the Court below, worth interference in the revisional jurisdiction. There is no merit in this revision application, which is accordingly, dismissed.

( H. C. Mishra, J.)

R.Kr.