MANJUNATH C. KAMMAR Vs. A. KANTHILAK AND COMPANY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner.

(2.) SINCE the parties in both the petitions are one and the same and since the common questions of law and fact are involved in both these matters, both these matters are taken up simultaneously and are disposed of by the following common order.

(3.) THE respondent who is common in both these criminal petitions filed complaints against the petitioner alleging offences punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, I Court, Gadag and same were registered as P.C. Nos. 63 and 84 of 1998. After taking cognizance, the same were registered as C.C. Nos. 485 and 608 of 1998 respectively. The learned Magistrate issued process to the revisional petitioner in both the matters. The petitioner herein who is the accused before the Court below filed applications under Section 258 of the Cr. P.C. praying the Court to stop the further proceedings. The learned Magistrate dismissed the said applications by the order dated 26 -5 -1999. The legality of the said order was questioned before the Sessions Court, Gadag in Criminal Revision Petition Nos. 29 and 30 of 2000. The learned Sessions Judge dismissed both the criminal revision petitions. Hence the present criminal petitions are filed before this Court invoking Section 482 of the Cr, P.C. 5. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner has urged various contentions on the merits of the matter and contended that the Magistrate ought to have dropped the proceedings as there is no merit in continuing the criminal proceedings before the Magistrate Court. 6. The matters on hand are summons cases based on the complaint filed under Section 200 of the Cr. P.C. The maximum punishment that can be imposed on the accused in the event of his conviction is two years. 7. In this connection, it is relevant to extract Section 258 of the Cr. P.C. which reads thus: