RANVEER SHARMA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties. By means of this petition, moved under section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner has chal- lenged the order dated 12.4.2004, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Haridwar, in criminal revision No. 464 of 2003, whereby said Court has allowed the revision and set aside the order dated 4.8.2003, passed by Magistrate, summoning the accused (respondents No. 3 to 6).

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the petitioner moved an application on 24.9.2002 under section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C. before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar, stating that he has been cheated of Rs.58,000/- by the accused namely Ramesh Chandra, Kanta Devi, Sanjeev and Rajeev by projecting themselves as owner of the shop, which was transferred to the petitioner to run a restaurant. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, appears to have issued direction to the police on the basis of which a First Information Report No. 246 of 2002, was registered with police station Kotwali Haridwar. However, after investigation, on 30.1.2003, the police submitted a final report holding that alleged accused has committed no offence and the shop was given to the petitioner to run the restaurant on contract at the rate of Rs.200/- per day. It appears that on said final report, notices were issued by the Magistrate and protest petition (copy Annexure-4 to this petition) was filed before the Magistrate by the petitioner. After hearing the complainant/petitioner, the Magistrate recorded the statement of the complainant and the witnesses under section 200 and under section 202 Cr.P.C. and summoned the accused Ramesh Chandra, Kanta Devi, Sanjeev and Rajeev, vide his order dated 4.8.2003 to face the trial in respect of the offences punishable under sections 457, 420 and 380 I.P.C. Against said order, the accused filed a criminal revision No. 66 of 2003, before Sessions Judge, Haridwar. Sessions Judge, Haridwar, after hearing the parties, vide his order dated 14.10.2003, dismissed the revision. On this, accused (respondents No. 3 to 6), filed criminal misc. application No. 243 of 2003, before this Court, which was heard and disposed of by this Court vide its order dated 20.10.2003 (copy Annexure- 8 to this petition), whereby the matter was remanded back to the Sessions Judge to decide the criminal revision afresh by going into the question as to propriety of the summoning order, passed by the Magistrate. Learned revisional Court, again registered criminal revision with fresh number 464 of 2003, and after hearing the parties, decided the revision in compliance of this Court's order. This time, revision was allowed and the summoning order dated 4.8.2003, passed by Magistrate was set aside and final report stood accepted.