LAWS(ALL)-2005-2-179

SARWAN SINGH Vs. SURESH CHAND MATHUR

Decided On February 03, 2005
SARWAN SINGH REVISIONIST Appellant
V/S
SURESH CHAND MATHUR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant revision has been preferred against judgment and order dated 11/5/1999 passed by IV Additional District & Sessions Judge, Firozabad, in Criminal Revision no. 36 of 1994, Suresh Chand Mathur v. State of UP. and another, whereby order dated 23.4.1993 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Firozabad, rejecting the application of the accused respondent Suresh Chand Mathur for protection under Section 197 Cr.P.C. was set aside.

(2.) Heard Sri Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the revisionist, learned AGA and Sri M. B. Saxena, learned counsel for the respondent no. 1 and have gone through the record.

(3.) The fact of the case in brief is that Crime No. 114 of 1989 under Sections 420, 423, 424, 467, 471, 474 I.P.C. was registered at police station Jasrana, district Firozabad, on the application moved by the complainant Sarwan Singh in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Firozabad, who alleged that he was employed in Hinden, Ghaziabad, in military department and was resident of village Nagla Ahmad, police station Kotwali, district Etah. He had land of 2.10 acre in village Fatehpura Narain Singh, Pargana Mustafabad, Tehsil Jasrana, district Firozabad (earlier district Mainpuri). One Gyan Singh, son of Vishan Lal Kushwaha, resident of Om Nagar, Shitiya Road, Firozabad, in collusion with other persons got forged sale deed executed on 20.1.1987 when Sharwan Singh was on his duty. About two months thereafter Gyan Singh and others armed with lathi, spears, firearms reached the field and damaged the crop with tractor causing loss of Rs. 60,000/-. When crime was registered charge-sheet was submitted against accused other than the revisionist Suresh Chand Mathur. Later on an additional charge-sheet was submitted against the revisionist, who moved application under Section 197 Cr. P. C. alleging that he was a public officer and was entitled to protection under section under Section 197 Cr. P.C. There being no sanction under that Section, the case could not proceed against him.