Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
Dharam Kumar Saw @ Dharam Kr. Gupta son of Ritlal Sao – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGEMNT :
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
1. Heard Mr. Gaurav Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Sanjay Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the State and Mr. Ranjan Kumar Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no.2.
2. This criminal revision petition has been preferred challenging the order dated 25.02.2023 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad in connection with Complaint Case No.1581 of 2014, in which, the learned Court has been pleased to reject the petition dated 24.11.2017 filed by the petitioners under Section 245 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter to be referred to as “the Code”) for discharge.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners tried to convince the Court on merit, however the Court has put question to the learned counsel for the petitioners why the petitioners have surpassed the jurisdiction of the learned Sessions Judge by filing revision against the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate, he submits that the learned Sessions Judge and High Court are having the jurisdiction in light of Section 397 read with Section 399 and 401 of the Code, corresponding to Sections 438 read with Section 440 and 442 of the Bharatiya Nagri
The court emphasized the procedural propriety requiring litigants to first approach subordinate courts before the High Court unless exceptional circumstances justify bypassing this route.
Revision under Section 397(1) Cr.P.C. read with Section 401 Cr.P.C. not maintainable against the revisionary order of the Sessions Judge - No grounds for exercise of inherent power by this Court unde....
Magistrate's rejection of Section 156(3) CrPC application is final order, revisable under Section 397 CrPC before Sessions Court; writ under Article 226 not entertained due to efficacious alternate r....
Point of law : Applications under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. are now coming in torrent and thus exercise of the powers under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. should be used sparingly and not in routine manner.
Point of Law : Magistrate while exercising powers under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. cannot act as a post office as the Magistrate has to apply his mind with regard to the fact as to whether the cas....
A convicted individual must surrender before the court to maintain a revision under Sections 397 and 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code, as per the Allahabad High Court Rules.
A court cannot review its own judgment once signed, except to correct clerical errors, and inherent powers to recall judgments are limited to jurisdictional errors or violations of natural justice.
Proposed accused must be heard in revision against Magistrate's rejection of Section 156(3) CrPC application; no prejudicial order without opportunity under Section 401(2), applicable to Sessions Jud....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
