Shiv Kumar Sharma, J. - (1.) -The question that cropped up for consideration in this revision is whether a private person has locus standi in a police case to invoke the jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the Cr.P.C.)
(2.) This question emerges in the wake of circumstances set out below : (i) The complainant petitioner (for short the complainant) instituted FIR with the Police Station Bani Park Jaipur on August 20, 1994 against the accused non-petitioner No.2 (for short the accused). The police registered case No. 274/94 against the accused under sections 420, 467 and 468 IPC. and after investigation submitted charge sheet. Learned trial court vide its order dated July 25, 1996 framed charges against the accused under sections 420, 467, and 468 IPC. (ii) The accused thereafter assailed the order by filing revision. Learned Sessions Judge Jaipur City vide its order dated July 25, 1996 allowed the revision and quashed the order of the trial court. (iii) Against this order of the learned Sessions Judge that the present action for filing the revision has been resorted to by the complainant.
(3.) Mr. R.P Garg, learned counsel appearing for the accused raised preliminary objection in respect of maintainability of the revision. It was contended that a private person has no locus standi in a police case to invoke the jurisdiction of this court under Section 397/401 Cr.PC. Reliance was placed on Thakur Ram v. State of Bihar (AIR 1966 SC 911) Ganga Ram and Amichand Ahir v. Krishna Kumar and another (1997 (2) WLC (Raj.) 248) .;