SURENDRA KUMAR Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present Criminal Miscellaneous Application, under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has been preferred to quash the order dated 08.08.2014, passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Udham Singh Nagar in Criminal Revision No. 157 of 2012 as well as the order dated 01.06.2012 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Rudrapur in Case No. 65 of 2012.

(2.) Facts, in brief, are that applicant filed a complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC. In the complaint, it was alleged by the complainant that a quarter was allotted to his father; his mother died on 14.10.2001 and thereafter his brother (respondent no. 2 herein), in connivance with the respondents 3 and 4, forged a Will dated 30.4.2001 of his mother and got mutated his name (i.e. respondent no. 2) in the revenue records. Complainant further alleged that at about 3 o'clock in the day on 1.7.2001, respondent no. 2 stopped him in the way and assaulted and abused him and also threatened to kill him. Learned Judicial Magistrate, Rudrapur vide his order dated 01.06.2012, refused to issue process against the accused persons and dismissed the said complaint holding that the dispute is civil in nature and the complainant has narrated the alleged incident of 1.7.2001 just to instill substance in his complaint and there is no independent witness of the said incident. Applicant challenged the order dated 01.06.2012 by filing the Criminal Revision No. 157 of 2012, which was allowed by the Sessions Judge, Udham Singh Nagar vide his judgment and order dated 03.09.2012, whereby the order dated 01.06.2012, passed by the Judicial Magistrate, was set aside and a direction was made to issue process of summon to the accused persons. Feeling aggrieved accused persons assailed the order dated 03.09.2012, passed by the Sessions Judge, by filing Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 1332 of 2012, under Section 482 Cr.P.C., before this Court. A coordinate Bench of this Court, vide judgment and order dated 07.10.2013, allowed the aforesaid C-482 application on the ground that the accused persons were neither impleaded nor heard by the Sessions Judge while hearing the revision against the order of the Magistrate declining to issue process of summons. Vide the said judgment, this Court set aside the order dated 03.09.2012, passed by the Sessions Judge as well as the consequential order dated 19.10.2012, passed by the Judicial Magistrate and restored the Criminal Revision on the file and directed the parties to appear before the Revisional Court and also directed the complainant to implead the accused persons as respondents in the said criminal revision.

(3.) After the aforementioned judgment and order of this Court dated 7.10.2013, the accused persons were impleaded as respondents in the said criminal revision and the matter was heard again by the Revisional Court, and vide the impugned judgment and order dated 8.8.2014, learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Udham Singh Nagar dismissed the said revision and upheld the order dated 1.6.2012 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Rudrapur.