Research › Browse › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

1985 DIGILAW 979 (ALL)

Ram Khelawan v. Gurudin

1985-10-10

P.DAYAL

body1985
JUDGMENT P. Dayal , J. - The facts giving rise to this petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. art that the petitioner Ram Khelawan filed a criminal complaint under Section 380, 504 and 506, I.P.C against the opposite parties Gurudin and three others. That complaint was dismissed and the opposite parties wert acquitted. The Magistrate, while deciding the complaint case, issued notice under Section 250, Cr. P.C. to the complainant to show cause as to why the compensation should not be awarded against him and in favour of the opposite parties (accused of that case). That notice was given on the date of judgment on September 3, 1981 when the Magistrate heard the complainant and passed the impugned order, to the effect that the petitioner should give compensation to the opposite parties at the rate of Rs. 100 each and in default to undergo one months simple imprisonment. The complainant did not deposit the amount of compensation awarded against bit and he was taken into custody where after he was released for one month on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1,000 2. The petitioner filed a revision which was unwarranted as the law did not lay down that the revision was maintainable since there has bee provision for filing an appeal against that order. 3. Now it has been contended on behalf of the petitioner that the Magistrate should have not excepted (sic executed) his order for one month as contemplated by Section 250(6), Cr. P.C. He further referred to sub section (7) of Section 250, Cr. P.C. 4. Since the complainant was called upon to show cause on the day when the judgment was pronounced, he was not expected to contain at amount of the 400 with him and the learned Magistrate ought to have give him some time to procure money and to pay or deposit the same for the opposite parties. 5. Therefore, the provisions of Section 482, Cr. P.C. came into play for securing the ends of justice and this petition succeeds. 6. The petition is allowed and the impugned order awarding compensation to the opposite parties 1 to 4 is quashed.