M.K.Mittal - (1.) -The revision has been filed for quashing the order dated 17.3.2008, passed by Additional Sessions Judge (Special Judge) E.C. Act, Basti, in Criminal Revision No. 1160/06, whereby he allowed the revision and set aside the order dated 25.11.2006, passed by learned Magistrate and remanded the case for decision according to law.
(2.) I have heard Sri Rajul Bhargava, learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. and have perused the material on record. The brief facts of the case are that the first information report was lodged by one Ram Lal Chaukidar of the village on 6.9.2006 at 5.30 p.m. at Police Station Dhudhara, alleging that on 5.9.2006 Amar Singh Chaudhary who was Muneem at the shop of Akbar Master had gone to clean the tank on the roof of the house of Akbar Master. At that place Shamim alias Lal Babu son of Akbar Master was handling the licensed rifle of his father, which fired and the shot after hitting the wall, hit Amar Singh Chaudary as a result of which he received injuries. First he was taken to Basti for treatment and then Lucknow. Amar Singh Chaudhary was medically examined on 5.9.2006 in the District Hospital and the following injuries were found on his person (1) Firearm wound of entry 1 c.m. 1 c.m. depth not probed on the right side back of abdomen above posterior superior iliac spine. Fresh bleeding was present and x-ray of abdomen was advised. (2) Firearm wound of exit 5 c.m. 3 c.m. on right side abdomen 7 c.m. below umbilicus part of intestine was coming out from wound and fresh bleeding was present. X-ray was advised. Patient was admitted. The boy Amar Singh Chaudhary died consequent to the injuries on 16.9.2006. The post mortem examination was conducted on 17.9.2006 at 1 p.m. at Balaram Pur Hospital, Lucknow. The cause of death has been noted as septicaemia as a result of ante mortem injuries.
(3.) AFTER investigation the Investigating Officer submitted charge-sheet under Sections 304, 201 and 308 I.P.C. and the learned Magistrate took cognizance under these sections. Ram Kumar Chaudhary father of the deceased moved an application for further investigation in the Court of the learned Magistrate alleging that the report in the matter was lodged by Ram Lal and his son was shifted to Basti and then to Lucknow without informing him. It was wrong to say that the bullet first hit the wall and then the boy. Had it been so there would have been no injury resulting in rupture of abdomen wherefrom the intestine also came out. The statements of the applicant and his family members were not recorded by the Investigating Officer and he only examined two witnesses closely related to the accused. The Investigating Officer even did not interrogate the Medical Officer as to whether the bullet directly hit the body or first hit the wall and then the body. The Investigating Officer also did not take the rifle, cartridge the bullet and blood from the place of occurrence in custody. He has reduced the offence. In the circumstances, the prayer was made for direction for further investigation. The learned Magistrate by order dated 25.11.2006 held that although case was initially registered under Section 308, I.P.C. but the charge-sheet has been submitted under Section 304, I.P.C. and perusal of the case diary also shows that rifle was also taken in custody and its chemical examination was also done. The cognizance has been taken on the charge-sheet and there was no occasion for any further investigation. Feeling aggrieved by this order the father of the deceased preferred criminal revision.;