SIngte Bench IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUbICATURE OF CHHATTCS6ARH AT BILASPUR PETITIONER (COMPLAINANT) •? RESPONDENTS : (ACCUSED) ^^^ .^^' \.^ r^y'' \ \\ •^' .^i'-' -.i-"'^.^' \n^' .•fy' ^ v: A CR.M.P. N0., ^ ^ /20U Tarun Kumar Dadsena S/o Shri Ujiyar Lal Dadsena, Aged about 40 years, R/0 18/34, Pipe Factory Rocd, New Shanti Nagar, Raipur, P.S. Civil Lines, Tahsil & District Raipur (C.6.) VERSUS 1) Vikash Chand Sinha S/0 Mukund Lal Sinha ,Aged about 45 years, R/0 Lakhe Nagar, Mahadev Ghat Road, P.S. Purani Basti, Tahsil & District Raipur (C.G.) 2) State of Chhattisgarh Through: District Magistrate Raipur.Distnct Raipur, (C.6.) PETITCON UNDER SECTCON 482'READ OF CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 1973, HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR PETITIONER (COMPLAINAT) ESPONDENTS VERSUS 1) 2) CR.M.P. N0. 99/2011 Tarun' Kumar Dadsena S/o Shri Ujiyar Lal Dadsena, Aged about 4cf years, R/6 18/34, Pipe Factory Road, New Shanti Nagar, Raipur, P.S. Civil Lines, Tahsil 8s District Raipur (C.G.). Vikash Chand Sinha S/0 Mukund Lal Sinha, Aged about 45 years, R/0 Lakhe Nagar, Mahadev Ghat Road, P.S. Purani Basti, Tahsil 8s District Raipur (C.G.). State of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). PETITION UNDER SECTION 482 OF CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. (SB :Hon'ble Mr. T.P.Sharma, J.) Present:- Shri Y.C. Sharma,Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Rakesh Kumar Jha, Dy. G.A. for the State/respondent No. 2. Respondent No. 1 not noticed. ORAL- ORDER (Passed on 25/02/2011) By this petifion under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short 'the Code') petitioner has challenged the legality and propriety of the order dated 10/1/2011 passed by 10th Additional Sessions Judge Raipur (C.G.) in unregistered criminal revision (Tarun Kumar Dadsena v. Vikash Chand Sinha and another) affirming the order dated 6/10/2010 passed by . Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur whereby Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur has dismissed the complaint filed on behalf of the petitioner under Section 203 of the Code. Shri Y.C. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner 85 Shri Rakesh Kumar Jha, Dy. G.A. for the State/respondent No. 2 are heard. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that evidence adduced on behalfof the petitioner/complainant was sufficient for proceeding under SeGtion 204 of the Code but.instead of proceeding under Section 204 of the Code by trial Court and directing for further inquiry under Section 398 of the Code by 10th Additional Sessions Judge Raipur (C.G.j, both the Courts below have committed an illegality. •2- 4. Learned counsel for the State/respondent No. 2 opposed the petition. 5. Order impugned and order of trial Court perused, without further commehts considering the material produced on behalf of the petitioner, which reflects in Para-2 of the orders impugned both the orders are hereby set aside. Case is remanded back to the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur for making further inquiry. into complaint dismissed under Section 203 of fhe Code in terms of Section 398 of the Code. Petitioner is directed to present before the trial Gourt on 17/3/2011 for further progress of the case. Certified copy asperrules. '—-—-—. .._ T. P. Shamia Judge ^ -\v