Krishna Kumar Sahu v. Ajay Chandrakar

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Order Reserved on : 14/11/2018 Order Delivered on : 02/01/2019 Criminal Revision No. 916 of 2018

1. Krishna Kumar Sahu S/o Late Shri C. R. Sahu Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Chandana, Chowki Karelibeda, Police Station Magalod, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh, District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh

2. Dr. Manjeet Kaur Bal D/o Shri D. S. Bal Aged About 40 Years R/o F3c, Block 22/301, Sector 27, New Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners/ Complainants

Versus

Ajay Chandrakar S/o Late Kaliram Chandrakar Aged About 53 Years Presently Holding The Constitution Post Of Cabinet Minister Of The State Of Chhattisgarh For The Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Health Department, Legislative Affairs Department, R/o Near Bajrang Chowk, Village And Post Kurud District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh, District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondent For the Petitioners :

Shri Satish Chandra Verma, Advocate.

For the Respondent :

Shri Prateek Sharma, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant CAV ORDER 1.

This revision has been brought challenging the legality, propriety and correctness of the order dated 28.5.2018 passed in M.J.C. No. 5 of 2018 by the Learned Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act), Dhamtari, District Dhamtari, rejecting the prayer of the petitioners for passing an order under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C.

2.

I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties at length and also perused the evidence available on record.

3.

The submissions and the prayer that have been made by counsel for the revisionist are based on the same facts which were earlier raised before this Court in W.P. (Cr.) No. 63 of 2017 which was decided by the order dated 24.8.2017 dismissing the petition and the very same facts were raised by the petitioners in their application under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. before the Court below which has been decided and rejected by the impugned order. Hence, going into the merits of the case again will amount to review of the earlier order passed by this Court and there is no provision under Cr.P.C. permitting the Court to review its own order. Therefore, I do not find any illegality or irregularity committed by the Court below in rejecting the application of the petitioners on this basis that the matter has already been decided and thus, not a subject to review.

4.

In view of above, this revision is without any substance which is dismissed accordingly.

Sd/- (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge Nimmi