SUBRATA CHOUDHURY Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted. An affirmative answer to the question of law raised before the High Court as to whether after the acceptance of a negative Final Report filed under Sec. 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, the 'Cr.P.C.'), upon considering the written objection/ protest petition and hearing complainant, a fresh complaint on the same set of facts is maintainable, by the High Court of Gauhati and the consequential confirmation of the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Cachar, Silchar in Criminal Revision Petition No.101/2012, as per judgment and order dtd. 8/1/2021 in Criminal Revision Petition No.95/2013 is under challenge in this appeal by special leave. As per the said judgment dtd. 8/1/2021, the High Court dismissed the revision petition and confirmed the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge dtd. 28/2/2013 in Criminal Revision Petition No.101/2012 whereunder the order dtd. 12/7/2012 of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Cachar, Silchar dismissing the complaint filed by the second respondent herein was set aside and case was remanded for consideration of the matter afresh for the purpose arriving at a finding as to whether any case for taking cognizance of the alleged offence(s) and for issuance of process has been made or not.

(2.) Facts and circumstances giving rise to the captioned appeal, in succinct, are as under: -

(3.) Pursuant to the order dtd. 24/5/2012, the learned CJM considered the application filed by the appellants raising the question of maintainability of the second complaint and dismissed the second complaint holding it not maintainable in law. Against the said order of the CJM dtd. 12/7/2012, the second respondentcomplainant filed Criminal Revision Petition No.101 of 2012. The learned Sessions Judge allowed the said Criminal Revision Petition as per Annexure P-10 order dtd. 28/2/2013 and set aside the order of the CJM and remanded the case for reconsideration of the matter afresh for the purpose of finding whether any case for taking cognizance of the alleged offences and issuance of process have been made out or not. Aggrieved by the said order dtd. 28/2/2013 the appellants preferred Criminal Revision No.95 of 2013 which was dismissed by the High Court as per the impugned order dtd. 8/1/2021.