CRL.REV.P. 315/2018 Page 1 of 10

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+

CRL.REV.P. 315/2018

Date of decision: 22^nd FEBRUARY, 2021

IN THE MATTER OF:

SHYAM SINGH YADAV

..... Petitioner

Through

Mr. Mohit Chaudhary, Advocate

versus

THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents

Through

Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, APP for

State

Mr. Gurinder Singh, Advocate for

R-2

Mr. Harsh Jaidka, Advocate for R-3

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD

SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J.

1.

This revision petition filed under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C is directed

against the order dated 12.12.2017, passed by the Additional Sessions

Judge-02 (South East District) Saket Courts, New Delhi, in Criminal Appeal

No. 487/2017 where by the Additional Sessions Judge has held that the

offence under Section 307 IPC is not made out againt the respondent Nos.2

and 3 and has sent the case back to the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate

(South-east) Saket Courts without framing a charge.

2.

The short question which arises for consideration in this revision

petition is the consequence of a Sessions Judge taking the view, that the

offence is not exclusively triable by him under Section 228(1)(a) Cr.P.C. In

such a situation, is the Sessions Judge required to frame charges before

2021:DHC:634

CRL.REV.P. 315/2018 Page 2 of 10

transferring the case to the Chief Judicial Magistrate ?

3.

Shorn of unnecessary details the facts leading to this revision petition

are as under:

a)

On 02.11.2011, a complaint was submitted to the ACP,

Ambedkar Nagar, New Delhi stating that at about 12 noon the

complainant/petitioner herein went to Dr. Karni Singh shooting range,

Tughlakabad to participate in a shooting event. It is stated that when

he was going to Lane Number 11 assigned to him by the range officer,

the accused Avtar Singh Sethi, Senior Vice President and Baljit

Singh Sethi, ex-Secretary prevented him from entering the lane. It is

alleged that when he tried to go there they caught hold of his throat

which suffocated him and he fell down. It is stated that crowd

gathered there and the complainant was rescued. It is stated that the

accused Avtar Singh Sethi and the accused Baljit Singh Sethi, sent

him out of the range and threatened him that if the complainant comes

there again then they will get cases registered against him. The charge

sheet further states that on the receipt of the complaint the

complainant was medically examined at the AIIMS Trauma centre

and the doctor opined that the nature of injury is simple. The charge-

sheet states that the complainant approached the court by filing an

application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C for registration of FIR and as

per the direction of the court an ATR was filed 01.05.2012. It is stated

in the charge-sheet that the Metropolitan Magistrate-04 (South), Saket

Court, New Delhi directed the police station Ambedkar Nagar to

lodge an FIR under appropriate sections. Consequently an FIR was

2021:DHC:634

CRL.REV.P. 315/2018 Page 3 of 10

registered. After hearing the arguments on point of charge the learned

Metropolitan Magistrate-08 (South East), Saket Courts, New Delhi

came to the conclusion that in view of the material available on record

and specific allegations made in the complaint prima facie offence

under Section 307 IPC is made out which is exclusively triable by

learned Sessions Court. Accordingly, the learned Metropolitan

Magistrate committed the case to the Court of Sessions. The file

complete in all respects was sent to the court of Ld. District and

Sessions Judge (In-cha