TARKESHWAR SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2, the informant.

(2.) THE last order dated 27.1.2005 records the fact that petitioner was granted an opportunity to convert this application into one u/s. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure but that offer was declined. This Court finds that the impugned order passed by the trial Court was under the conspectus of the Code of Criminal Procedure and since petitioner has statutory alternative remedy hence this petition will not be permitted to be maintained under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India. Learned counsel for the petitioner opted that this petition be confined to Art. 227. of the Constitution of India. The matter has been heard thereafter treating his petition to be under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India only.

(3.) IN course of arguments learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. S.B.K. Mangalam very fairly accepted that in substance the challenge of the petitioner was to the same order dated 5.9.2003 as contained in Annexure -10 but he tried to show that this time the challenge is on the basis that there is no sufficient evidence for summoning petitioner u/s. 319. of the Code of Criminal Procedure whereas u/s. 482, Cr PC. The challenge was on certain technical grounds only.