DELSINORA DYMPEP Vs. HASINA KHARBHIH
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
Click here to view full judgement.
S.R.SEN, J. -
(1.) Heard learned counsel Mr. T.T. Diengdoh assisted by Mr. K. Baruah, the learned counsel for the petitioner.
(2.) The learned counsel Mr. TT Diengdoh submits that 5 (five) Criminal Petitions (SH) Nos. 58 of 2012, 59 of 2012, 60 of 2012, 61 of 2012 and 62 of 2012 arise out of common complaint dated 22.04.2009 which was registered as CR No. 316 (S) 2009. Since 5 (five) Revision Petitions arose out of the common complaint, matter has been taken up for disposal by this common judgment.
(3.) The learned counsel Mr. T.T Diengdoh contended that the complainant had filed the said complaint with an intention to harass the petitioner. He also submits that before filing the complaint, an FIR was lodged in Laitumkhrah PS Case No. 65 (9) 2008 on the same subject matter. Since the Court could not arrive on the conclusion till date, the police filed an FR in the said PS case. The petitioner moved this instant Revision Petition for quashing the proceeding pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate as CR No. 316 (5) 2009. The learned counsel also referred to Section 210 of the CrPC and submits that, proceeding before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, a mandatory provision of Section -210 has been grossly violated and the case cannot be proceeded. Further more, in spite of direction given by the District & Sessions Judge, the case has not been disposed of within a specific time. He also further submits that the FR filed has already been accepted. In support of his submission, the learned senior counsel relied on the decision of the Apex Court in State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal reported in (1992) Supp (1) SCC 335 and prayed that the proceeding under CR No. 316 (S) 2009 may be quashed.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.