Back
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Alok Verma, J.
Ajay v. State of M.P.
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.8953 of 2014 (Indore) : against the order of JMFC, Mhow in Criminal Trial No.2441 of 2007;
Decided on 18.11.2014
Held : Following the principles as laid down by the Hon'ble apex Court, in the present case, the charge-sheet filed on 12.12.2007. The present amendment came into force on 22.2.2008 that means in the present case, charge-sheet was filed prior to coming in operation of the present Amendment Act as laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court, the procedural law is retrospective and subsequently in the present case no statements of prosecution witness could be recorded till 28.7.2014 when the JMFC chooses to commit the case to the Court of Sessions. I find that the learned JMFC or learned Additional Sessions Judge committed no error of law. The trial of the case is covered by the amendment introduced by the new Act and, therefore, it should have been committed to the Court of Sessions and is rightly committed by the learned JMFC. AIR 2013 SC 1896 followed.
(2) Constitution of India -- Art.141 -- law of precedent -- earlier judgment of Single Judge on High Court, not in line with principles of law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court, is not binding precedent.
Held : It may be seen that the inferences drawn by Single Judge of this Court in the case of Rakesh Kumar Dubey (supra), are not in line with the principles laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court and, therefore, the case of Ramkesh Kumar Dubey (supra)cannot be followed in other cases. AIR 2013 SC 1896 followed. 2014(II) MPWN 128 dissented. 2008(2) JLJ 265 (FB) overruled.
¼1½ naM+ izfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 izFke vuqlwph esa la’kks/ku ¼e-iz- la’kks/ku½ vf/kfu;e] 2007 && /kkjk 4 && naM+ lafgrk] 1860 && /kkjk 420] 467] 468 rFkk 471 && vkijkf/kd fof/k && izfØ;k && ijh{k.k U;k;ky; && la’kks/ku }kjk U;kf;d eftLVªsV izFke Js.kh ds U;k;ky; ls l= U;k;ky; dks vf/kdkfjrk es ifjorZu && yafcr ekeyksa ij izHkko && 12-12-2007 dks U;kf;d eftLVªsV izFke Js.kh ds le{k /kkjk 420] 467] 468 ,oa 471 Hkk-na-fo- ds v/khu vkjksi&i= izLrqr fd;k x;k rFkk 15-7-2008 dks vkjksi fojfpr fd, x, && ml le; ;s vijk/k U;kf;d eftLVªsV izFke Js.kh }kjk ijh{k.k ;ksX; Fks && 28-7-2014 rd vfHk;ksxh lkf{k;ksa dk dksbZ dFku vfHkfyf[kr ugha fd;k x;k && fdarq 22-2-2008 ls izHkkfor la’kks/ku }kjk ;s vijk/k l= U;k;ky; }kjk ijh{k.k ;ksX; cuk fn, x, && U;kf;d eftLVªsV izFke Js.kh }kjk ekeyk l= U;k;ky; dks lqiqnZ fd;k x;k && mfpr gSA vfHkfu/kkZfjr % ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; }kjk izfrikfnr U;k; fla)kr ds vulqkj] orZeku ekeys esa] vkjksi&i= 12-12-2007 dks izLrqr fd;k x;kA orZeku la’kks/ku 22-2-2008 dks izHkko es vk;k] ftldk vFkZ gS fd orZeku ekeys es] vkjksi&i= orZeku la’kks/ku vf/kfu;e ds izoRkZu esa vkus ds iwoZ izLrqr dj fn;k x;k FkkA tSlk fd ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; }kjk izfrikfnr fd;k x;k gS] izfØ;k fof/k Hkwry{kh gksrh gS ,oa rRi’pkr~ orZeku ekeys esa vfHk;ksxh lk{; ds dksbZ dFku fnukad 28-7-2014] tc U;kf;d eftLVªsV izFke Js.kh us ekeys dks l= U;k;ky; dks lqiqnZ djus ds fy, pquk] rd vfHkfyf[kr ugha fd, tk ldsA eS bl fu”d”kZ ij igq¡prk gw¡ fd fo}ku U;kf;d eftLVªsV izFke Js.kh ;k fo}ku vfrfjDRk l= U;k;k/kh’k us dksbZ fof/kd Hkwy ugha dh gSA izdj.k dk ijh{k.k u, vf/kfu;e }kjk ykxw fd, x, la’kks/ku ls vkojf.kr gS blfy, izdj.k l= U;k;ky; dks lqiqnZ fd;k tkuk pkfg, Fkk rFkk fo}ku U;kf;d eftLVªsV izFke Js.kh }kjk Bhd&gh lqiqnZ fd;k x;k gSA , vkb vkj 2013 ,l lh 1896 vuqlfjrA ¼2½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku && vuq-141 && iwoZ U;k; fof/k && mPp U;k;ky; ds ,dy U;k;/kh’k dk iwoZ fu.kZ; ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; }kjk izfrikfnr U;k; fla)kr ds vuqlkj u gksus ls ca/kudkjh iwoZ U;k; ugha gSA vfHkfu/kkZfjr % ;g ns[kk tk ldrk gS fd bl U;k;ky; ds ,dy U;k;k/kh’k }kjk jkds’k dqekj nqcs ¼iwoksZDr½] ds ekeys esa tks fu”d”kZ fudkys x, gS os ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; }kjk izfrikfnr U;k; fl)akr ds vuqlkj ugha gSA vr% jkds’k dqekj nqcs ¼iwoksZDr½] ds ekeys ds fu”d”kZ dk vU; ekeyksa esa vuqlj.k ugha fd;k tk ldrkA , vkb vkj 2013 ,l lh 1896 vuqlfjrA 2014¼2½ e-iz- ohDyh uksV~l 128 vlgerA 2008¼2½ ts ,y ts 265 ¼iw.kZ U;k;ihB½ myV fn;kA
1. This application is filed under section 482 of CrPC and directed against the order of committal of Criminal Trial bearing No.2441/2007 by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mhow whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge opined that the committal of the case was necessary in the light of law laid down by Hon'ble apex Court in Ramesh Kumar Soni v. State of Madhya Pradesh [2013 ILR 741 (SC)].
2. The brief facts giving rise to this application are that the Crime No.29/2007 was registered against the present applicant under sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC. It is alleged that he submitted forged mark-sheet regarding his date of birth to secure employment in the army. The charge-sheet was filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class on 12.12.2007. The learned Judicial Magistrate framed charges on 15.7.2008. The case was subsequently fixed for prosecution evidence, however, till 26.6.2014, statement of no prosecution witness could be recorded. Thereafter, the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class in the light of the principles laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ramesh Kumar Soni (supra), committed the case for trial to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Mhow.
3. In the light of above factual backdrop, the applicant relies on the order of coordinate Bench of this Court in Rakesh Kumar Dubey v. State of M.P. and another [2014(II) MPWN 128], and prays that the impugned order of committal dated 28.07.2014 is not in line with the principles laid down by the Hon'ble apex Court as well as this Court in the case of Rakesh Kumar Dubey (supra), and accordingly prays that the order of committal be set aside and case be remanded back to JMFC for further trial.
4. To decide the controversy, we may see the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ramesh Kumar Soni (supra), the Hon'ble spex Court held that the criminal procedure (Madhya Pradesh Amendment Act), 2007 came into force on its publication on 22.2.2008, therefore, it is to be seen what should be the cut of date for deciding that the provisions introduced by the Act would apply on the pending cases. Hon'ble Supreme Court held that it is the date of which charge-sheet is filed before the Court of Judicial Magistrate which would form the cut of date to decide applicability of new provisions introduced by the Act. Hon'ble Supreme Court held that it is the date of cognizance which from the basis of institution of the case because before such date no case is pending before the Magistrate.
5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court overruled the order passed in reference case Re: Amendment of First Schedule of Criminal Procedure Code by Criminal Procedure Code (M.P. Amendment) Act [2008(2) JLJ 265 (FB)=2007 2008(3) MPLJ 311pressing into service the doctrine of prospective overruling meaning thereby the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that :
1. all the procedural law which changed forum of trial are prospective unless specifically made retrospective and,
2. that overruling of the full Bench decision of Madhya Pradesh High Court will not affect the cases that have already been tried or at advance stage before the Magistrate in the terms of said decision.
6. Coming to the order passed in the case of Ramesh Kumar Soni (supra), the learned Single Judge observed in para 2 of the order that :
“2. As per prosecution story, one written compliant was filed on 5.8.1993 to the Director General of Police, Bhopal stating therein that Umadevi w/o Rakesh Kumar Dwivedi had executed one forged and fabricated Will dated 5.1.1993 in respect to the property situated at Dabra which was under the ownership of Keshav Dayal Sharma. This Will was executed by Umadevi who is daughter-in-law of said Keshav Dayal Sharma. On the date of execution of the aforesaid Will, Keshav Dayal was stated to be ill and under treatment and the Will was allegedly executed with the help of other co-accused, namely, Shivshankar, Kaushal Kishore, Ramashankar, Narendra Nath including the pre
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
