Smt. Shakuntala Devi vs State and Another

Dharam Veer, J.—This criminal revision, preferred u/s 397/401 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as Cr.P.C.), is directed against the judgment and order dated 7.1.2010 passed by Sessions Judge, Haridwar in Criminal Revision No. 279 of 2009, Smt. Sharmila v. State of Uttarakhand.

Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the material available on file.

Brief facts of the case are that revisionist Smt. Shakuntala Devi filed a complaint before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar and got registered a complaint case No. 1275 of 2008 against the respondent No. 2 Smt. Sharmila @ Sonia, relating to offence punishable u/s 406 of IPC. The complainant in support of her complaint examined herself u/s 200 Cr.P.C. and u/s 202 Cr.P.C. Umesh Pandey and Kishan Kumar were got examined. After hearing learned Counsel for the complainant and perusing the material available, learned Ist Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar, vide order dated 18.2.2009 summoned the respondent No. 2 to face the trial. Feeling aggrieved with the said summoning order, the respondent No. 2 preferred a revision before Sessions Judge, Haridwar, who, vide his judgment and order dated 7.1.2010 allowed the revision of respondent No. 2 and quashed the summoning order dated 18.2.2009. Against the said judgment and order dated 7.1.2010, the revisionist/complainant has preferred the present revision before this Court.

Learned Counsel for the revisionist solely argued that as per judgment of Hon''ble Apex Court in the case of " Adalat Prasad Vs. Rooplal Jindal and Others, , against the summoning order, only a petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is maintainable. As such, the judgment and order dated 7.1.2010 passed by Sessions Judge, Haridwar, against the summoning order, is without jurisdiction. Mr. Amit Bhatt, learned Addl. GA for the State and Mr. Raman Kumar Sah, learned Counsel for respondent No. 2 has also conceded to this point.

In view of the above, the revision is allowed. The judgment and order dated 7.1.2010 passed by Sessions Judge, Haridwar, in criminal revision No. 279 of 2009, is hereby set aside. However, the respondent No. 2 is at liberty to avail appropriate remedy before the appropriate forum.