Delhi District Court
Insp. Indra Sharma vs . State & Anr. on 8 September, 2008
-:1:-
C.R. NO. 22/08
Insp. Indra Sharma Vs. State & Anr.
IN THE COURT OF SHRI B. R. KEDIA ; A.S.J.
TIS HAZARI COURTS ; DELHI
Crl. (R) No. : 22/08
Insp. Indra Sharma
Presently Posted as
SHO, Mukherji Nagar
..........Petitioner
Versus
1. The State
(NCT of Delhi)
2. Smt. Baljeet Kaur
W/o Sh. Jitender Singh
R/o 2/53-A, Nirakari Colony,
Kingsway Camp,
Delhi - 110 009
..........Respondent.
Date of institution 19.03.2008.
Arguments heard on 05.09.2008.
Order delivered on 08.09.2008.
O R D E R :-
-:2:-
C.R. NO. 22/08 Insp. Indra Sharma Vs. State & Anr.
By virtue of this order I shall dispose of the instant Criminal Revision, which is directed against the order dt. 18.03.2008 as passed by Ld. M.M. in the complaint case bearing C. C. No.52/01/08, P.S. Mukherji Nagar, titled "Smt. Baljit Kaur Vs. SHO, P.S. Mukherji Nagar", whereby, Ld. M.M. was pleased to direct the Commissioner of Police to register FIR as against Inspector Indra Sharma, SHO, P.S. Mukherji Nagar and to get the investigation done by any other agency other than that of P.S. Mukherji Nagar. So, by being aggrieved against the said order of Ld. M.M., Inspector Indra Sharma has preferred this revision.
2. I have heard Sh. R.S. Malik, Advocate, Ld. -:3:- C.R. NO. 22/08 Insp. Indra Sharma Vs. State & Anr.
Counsel for the petitioner, Ld. APP for the State/respondent no.1, Sh. Mohit Vohra, Advocate, Ld. Counsel for respondent no.2 and perused the relevant record.
3. It is submitted by Sh. Mohit Vohra, Adv. Ld. Counsel for respondent no.2 that as this revision is directed against the impugned order dt :
18.03.2008, whereby Ld. M.M has allowed the application U/S 156 (3) Cr.P.C of the complainant and have passed order for registration of the FIR as against Inspector Indra Sharma, SHO, P.S. Mukherji Nagar, this revision petition is not legally maintainable and Ld. counsel referred and relied upon following judgments in support of his -:4:- C.R. NO. 22/08 Insp. Indra Sharma Vs. State & Anr.
contentions : -
1.2008 (1) CC Cases 29 (Allahabad) Vishnu Vs. State of U.P. 2.2008 Crl. J. 839 Gangadhar Behera & Anr. Vs. State of Orissa & Anr.
3.2008 Crl. J. 1162 (Allahabad) Smt. Gulista & Ors. Vs. State of U.P & Anr. 4.2008 Crl. J 1515 (Allahabad) Prof. Ram Naresh Chaudhary & Anr. Vs. State of U.P & Ors.
It is further added by Ld. Counsel for respondent no.2 that proper remedy for the petitioner is not the revision before this court but -:5:- C.R. NO. 22/08 Insp. Indra Sharma Vs. State & Anr.
she should have approach the Hon'ble High Court for quashing the proceedings. Ld. Counsel for respondent no.2 thus urged for dismissal of this revision.
4. However, ld. Addl. P.P on behalf of the state/respondent no.1 submitted that appropriate order as may be deem fit and proper by this court may be passed in this matter.
5. However, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the impugned order dt :
18.03.2008 as passed by Ld. M.M is a judicial order and same is amenable to the revisional jurisdiction -:6:- C.R. NO. 22/08 Insp. Indra Sharma Vs. State & Anr.
and referred and relied upon the following judgments : -
1.2001 Crl. J. 313 (Allahabad) Ajai Malviya Vs. State of U.P & Ors.
2.2002 Crl. J. 4563 (Allahabad) Sabir Vs. Jaswant & Ors.
It is further added by Ld. Counsel for the petitioner that the judgment reported as 2001 Crl. J. 313, "Ajai Malviya Vs. State of U.P & Ors.", which has been rendered by Hon'ble 2 Judges Bench of Allahabad High Court, the judgments as referred and relied upon by Ld. counsel for respondent no.2 being judgment rendered by a Single Judge Bench of Allahabad High Court, -:7:- C.R. NO. 22/08 Insp. Indra Sharma Vs. State & Anr.
cannot have any overriding effect. It is further added by Ld. Counsel for the petitioner that as Ld. M.M has already taken cognizance on the complaint and has proceeded U/S 200 Cr.P.C, whereby recording statement of the complainant and her husband, therefore he cannot switch back thereby passing direction for registration of the FIR U/S 156 (3) Cr.P.C. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner added that on the said count the impugned order dt : 18.03.2008 of Ld. M.M. suffer from illegality in view of the judgment reported as 1977 (4) SCC 459, "Tula Ram & Ors. Vs. Kishore Singh".
6. I do not find any force in the submission of Ld. Counsel for respondent no.2 that this revision -:8:- C.R. NO. 22/08 Insp. Indra Sharma Vs. State & Anr.
is not maintainable as in the judgment reported as 2001 Crl. J. 313 "Ajai Malviya Vs. State of U.P & Ors", which is a judgment rendered by Hon'ble 2 Judges Bench of Allahabad High Court, wherein, it has been observed that the order U/S 156 (3) Cr.PC is a judicial order and is a amenable to revisional jurisdiction and in the light of the said judgment, the judgments as referred and relied upon by Ld. Counsel for respondent no.2 cannot be treated as binding in nature. In view of the same, I am of the considered view that this revision in the present form is duly maintainable.
7. Further more, from the perusal of the trial court record, it is reflected that Ld. M.M on taking -:9:- C.R. NO. 22/08 Insp. Indra Sharma Vs. State & Anr.
cognizance of the alleged offence on receipt of the complaint have recorded the statement of complainant Smt. Baljit Kaur as well as her husband Jitender Singh on the same date i.e. 18.03.2008, thereby proceeded U/S 200 Cr.P.C and therefore, he cannot revert back and give direction to the Commissioner of Police for registration of the FIR on the same complaint by taking recourse provision U/S 156 (3) Cr.P.C and on that count the impugned order dt : 18.03.2008 as rendered by Ld. M.M. found suffer from legal infirmity and my said view is found supported from the judgment as rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case reported as 1977 (4) SCC 459, "Tula Ram & Ors. Vs. Kishore Singh" and another judgment as -:10:- C.R. NO. 22/08 Insp. Indra Sharma Vs. State & Anr.
rendered by our Hon'ble Delhi High Court as reported as IV (2001) CCR 270 "Binoy Jacob Vs. State".
8. The net result of the aforesaid discussion is that as the impugned order dt : 18.03.2008 as rendered by Ld. M.M. found suffer from legal infirmity, the said order stand set aside with direction to Ld. M.M to proceed with the complaint in accordance with law and this revision stand allowed accordingly.
9. Let, the T.C.R along with the copy of this order be transmitted back to the court of concerned Ld. M.M. and after doing the needful by the Ahlmad -:11:- C.R. NO. 22/08 Insp. Indra Sharma Vs. State & Anr.
of this Court this revision file be consigned to record room.
Announced in the open Court (B.R. Kedia)
On 8th September, 2008 Addl.
Sessions Judge
Tis Hazari Courts
Delhi.