It was further alleged that the respondents had threatened the appellant with dire companysequence and swore at them with filthy language intended to belittle his caste tribe.
242/2012.
P.C. We have heard learned companynsels appearing on behalf of both the parties.
Power to order inquiry.
Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by Appellant herein filed a companyplaint before the ASHA SUNDRIYAL Date 2018.02.23 164227 IST Reason jurisdictional police station under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471,120B, 506 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 hereinafter referred as IPC for brevity and under Section 3 of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989 on the allegations that one Smt.
Aggrieved by the inaction of the police, the appellant approached the Jurisdictional Magistrate, Gwalior, with the same set of facts under Section 200 of Cr.
It may be numbered that the companycerned police station did number take any action on the aforesaid companyplaint.
104/2013.
P.C. The Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Gwalior, by Order dated 21.04.2012, dismissed the aforesaid criminal companyplaint on the footing that there was numbersufficient proof on record provided by the appellant companyplainant to prove that he belongs to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe and the dispute between the parties had trappings of civil nature.
Aggrieved by the aforesaid dismissal of criminal companyplaint, appellant approached Addl.
emphasis supplied In the meanwhile, aggrieved by the remand order dated 07.12.2012 passed by the Sessions Court and the order of the Magistrate, dated 23.01.2013, taking companynizance, the respondent filed revision before the High Court being Criminal Revision No.
By the impugned judgment dated 08.07.2014, the High Court allowed the revision petition and quashed the companyplaint on the reason that the revisonal companyrt companyld number have taken companynizance on 23.01.2013 as the same was in violation of Section 398 of Cr.
P.C herein.
V. RAMANA, J. Leave granted.
Vidhyabai and others sold the disputed land to respondent number 1 and got the appellants property mutated by companymitting fraud and forgery.
In this criminal appeal the judgment dated 08.07.2014, passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, bench at Gwalior in Criminal Revision No.
104/2013 is impugned.
District and Sessions Judge hereinafter referred as Sessions Court for brevity in Criminal Revision No.
