1 2025:CGHC:6704 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1236 of 2024 1 - Smt. Anita Pawar W/o Late Dilip Pawar Aged About 46 Years R/o Budhpara, Police Station- City Kotwali, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant (s) versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station-City Kotwali, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Mukesh Golchha S/o Shri Goutamchand Golchha Aged About 45 Years R/o Near Dani Bada, Budhapara, Police Station-City Kotwali, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Chintu @ Bhupendra Golchha S/o Shrichand Golchha Aged About 39 Years R/o Devendra Nagar, Police Station- Devendra Nagar, Raipur, Tehsil And District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Surendra Pathak Aged About 55 Years R/o Siddharth Chowk, Tikrapara, Police Station Tikrapara, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant (s) : Shri D.K. Gwalre, Advocate. For the State : Ms. Sunita Sahu, P.L. For Resp. No. 2 & 3 : Shri Tapan Kumar Chandra, Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 05/02/2025 2 1. With the consent of the parties, heard finally. 2. The instant revision has been filed under Section 438/442 of the BNSS, 2023 against the order dated 30/08/2024 passed by the Court of 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur (C.G.), whereby and whereunder the application filed under Section 193 of CrPC has been dismissed. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is widow of late Shri Dilip Pawar, who lost his life due to illegal criminal acts committed by the accused persons. FIR was lodged on 16/07/2013 against 8 accused persons under Sections 306, 365, 392, 34 of IPC and after holding investigation, charge-sheet was filed against five accused persons exonerating three accused persons i.e. respondents No. 2 Mukesh Golchha, respondent No. 3 Chintu @ Bhupendra Golchha and respondent No. 4 Surendra Pathak. He further submits that applicant who is wife of deceased Dilip Pawar moved an application 193 of CrPC before the trial Court, which was heard on merits and reserved for orders. He also submits that applicant was not appeared before the learned trial Court vide order-sheet dated 02/08/2024 and without going on to merits her application was dismissed on 30/08/2024. He further submits that Section 193 of CrPC no Court of Session shall take cognizance of any offence as a Court of original jurisdiction unless the case has been committed to it by a Magistrate under this Code. It is very clear that once the case is committed to the Court of Session by the learned Magistrate, the Court of Session assumes original jurisdiction. Hence, the matter may be remanded back to the learned trial Court for decide the case afresh. 3 4. Learned counsel for the respondents have supported the order passed by the learned trial Court. 5. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is evident from the record that the trial Court has not using the power under Section 193 of CrPC, therefore, this Court is of the opinion that the matter needs to be remitted back to the trial Court for passing the order on the application under Section 193 of CrPC afresh after affording due opportunity of hearing to both the parties. 7. In the result, the Criminal Revision is allowed and the impugned order dated 30/08/2024 is hereby set-aside. The matter is remitted back to the trial Court for passing the order on the application under Section 193 of CrPC afresh after affording due opportunity of hearing to both the parties, in accordance with law. Sd/-Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Kamde NARESH KUMAR KAMDE Digitally signed by NARESH KUMAR KAMDE Date: 2025.02.24 12:03:44 +0530