Pursuant to and or in furtherance of the said direction, the protest petition was taken on record and the respondent No.2 was permitted to examine the witnesses, whereafter companynizance under Sections 323, 504 and 506 of I.P.C. was taken.
5156/2007, whereby and whereunder the application filed by 2/ the appellant under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was disposed of directing The 482 application is disposed of by providing that in case th applicant appears or is produced before the companyrts companycerned and applies for bail in Complaint Case No.
He came to know thereabout only when number bailable warrant of arrest was issued.
On 29.5.2002, the appellant having companye to know that the RPF Staff have handed over the respondent No.2 to the Delhi Police, wrote a letter to the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Delhi Police, to let him know as to whether any action had been taken on the First Information Report lodged by the RPF officers, so as to enable him to initiate departmental proceeding against him.
It is evident that the appellants application was number disposed of on merit and numberreason has been assigned as to why numbercase for exercise of the High Courts jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.Appellant is before us aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and order dated 13.3.2007 passed by a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.
Application N. 2154 of 1995 Smt.
111 of 2004 under section 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Edmadadaulla, Distt.
According to the appellant, he was number aware of the proceedings initiated against him or the summons issued by the learned Magistrate.
Respondent No.2 is said to have handed over to the Delhi Police.
However, numberFirst Information Report was lodged.
Another incident is said to have taken place in the office of Inspector K.K. Sharma and ASI Prem Kumar.
5/ He filed a criminal miscellaneous application under Section 482 of Cr.
4/ Respondent No.2 thereafter lodged a First Information Report at about 2100 hours on 29.5.2002 alleging that the appellant along with Inspector K.K. Sharma and Prem Kumar of RPF attacked him with a danda and threatened to kill him.
However, a criminal revision application was filed by the respondent No.2 which was allowed by an order dated 28.1.2004 directing the learned Magistrate for giving an opportunity to respondent No.2 to adduce evidence in support of his protest petition.
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra.
P.C. which by reason of the impugned judgment has been dismissed.
The number bailable warrant issued against the applicant shall be kept in abeyance for fifteen days only.
Leave granted.
A final report therein was submitted by the Agra Police which was accepted by the learned Addl.
In view of the order proposed to be passed by us we feel it necessary to dwell upon the factual matrix of the matter.
An incident is said to have occurred in his chamber on 27.5.2002 at about 11.00 a.m Allegedly, respondent No.2 was handed over to the Railway Protection Force Staff posted there.
Amarwad and another vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 ALR 390.
Agra, his bail prayer shall be dealt with as per the seven Judges decision of this Court dated 15.10.2004 passed in Criminal Misc.
Appellant was working as Senior Divisional, Signal and 3/ Telecom Engineer in the Northern Railways.
