The Allahabad High Court has affirmed that without the surrender of the accused, the magistrate cannot commit a case to the sessions court.
This decision came while the court was addressing a petition involving the accused in a dowry death case.
The case revolves around the death of petitioner Ranjit’s wife, which prompted the lodging of an FIR at Jasrajpur police station under serious charges, including sections 498A, 304B, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, along with provisions of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Following multiple investigations and final reports by the police and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), the case has seen several legal twists.
The Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) earlier rejected the accused’s plea for discharge, asserting that the discharge hearing could not proceed until the case reached the sessions court.
The petitioners challenged this decision, but the High Court ruled that the CJM lacked the authority to consider a discharge petition before the session trial began.
While dismissing the plea, Justice Anees Kumar Gupta, who presided over the case, provided conditional relief to the petitioners.
The court instructed the accused to surrender before the magistrate within three weeks, following which the magistrate is to commit the case for trial in the sessions court within two weeks.
Additionally, the court has ordered the petitioners to file a discharge petition in the sessions court within four weeks of their surrender.
Importantly, the High Court has barred any arrest or harassment of the petitioners until the discharge petition is heard.
Case Background
The case has seen a long and complex legal trajectory.
After lodging the FIR, the police conducted three investigations and submitted final reports each time.
However, the complainant’s protest led to a re-investigation and further legal proceedings.
Eventually, the Human Rights Commission intervened, resulting in a CBI probe.
The CBI’s final report concluded that the death was due to an electrical accident, recommending action against the complainant rather than the accused.
Despite this, the magistrate had issued summons to the accused, prompting the current legal challenge.
Advocates BKS Raghuvanshi and Akshay Raghuvanshi represented the complainant in the High Court, arguing against the petitioners.
Also Read: Allahabad High Court Rules Widowed Daughter-In-Law Entitled To Maintenance From Father-In-Law
