ALOK KUMAR SINGH
RAM SABAD – Appellant
Versus
SESSIONS JUDGE BAHRAICH – Respondent
Heard Sri S. P. Dubey learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Sarvajeet Dubey learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.
2. At this stage there is no need to issue notices to opposite parties 3 to 12, the prospective accused, hence the same are dispensed with.
3. This petition under Section 482 Cr. P. C. has been filed to set aside the impugned order dated 18-11- 2006 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Bahraich and order dated 29-11-2006 passed by the Incharge Sessions Judge, Bahraich. By means of first impugned order the learned Magistrate treated the application under Section 156 (3) Cr. P. C. as complaint and fixed a date for recording the statement under Section 200 Cr. P. C. By means of second impugned order passed by the learned Incharge Sessions Judge the revision filed by the complainant (petitioner) was dismissed in limine at admission stage.
4. The facts giving rise to this case are that an application under Section 156 (3) Cr. P. C. was filed by the petitioner on 12- 10-2006 in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Bahraich against 10 persons (opposite parties Nos. 3 to 12) saying that opposite party No. 3 is a licence h
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.