This Court dismissed a criminal revision petition challenging an order by the Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh that set aside a prior dismissal of a complaint under Section 203 of Cr.P.C., finding no warrant for interference.
The criminal revision petition was dismissed, upholding the impugned order dated 25.06.2009.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr.M.P. No. 1198 of 2009
Reena Kumari …Petitioner -V e r s u s- 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Arjun Singh ... Opp. Parties CORAM: - HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR For the Petitioner :- Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Ravi Prakash, A.P.P. For O.P. no. 2 :- Mr. Afaque Ahmed, Advocate Mr. Sharabhil Ahmed, Advocate
07/01.04.2019 The present petition has been filed against the order dated 25.06.2009 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh in Criminal Revision No. 194 of 2008, whereby the order dated 30.09.2008 passed by the S.D.J.M., Hazaribagh in Complaint Case No. 1126 of 2008 by which the complaint filed by the opposite party no. 2 was dismissed under Section 203 of Cr.P.C., has been set aside.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record.
The learned Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh, vide impugned order dated 25.06.2019 after considering the prima facie evidence on record i.e. the statement of the opposite party no. 2 (the complainant) and his inquiry witnesses on oath, reached a conclusion that the learned S.D.J.M., Hazaribagh was not supposed to see the minor contradictions and discrepancy in the same and thus while setting aside the order dated 30.09.2008 passed by the S.D.J.M., Hazaribagh directed the said court to take cognizance of the offences against the petitioner. Since the learned Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh duly considered the prima facie materials brought on record by the opposite party no. 2, I see no reason to interfere with the impugned order dated 25.06.2009.
The present petition is accordingly dismissed.
(Rajesh Shankar, J.)
Ritesh
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the Sessions Judge's order setting aside the SDJM's dismissal of a criminal complaint.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Reena Kumari
The State of Jharkhand
Arjun Singh
Rajesh Shankar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
