ARIF ALI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) B. K. Rathi, J. By means of this revision under Section 397/401 Cr. P. C. the revisionists have prayed for the quashing of the order dated 02-09-1996 and the Criminal proceedings pending against them in the Court of 3rd Additional Cliief Judicial Magistrate. Etawah in Criminal Case No. 402 of 1995, B. P. Srivastava v. Arif AIL under Sections 147,148, 352,506i. P. C.

(2.) I have heard Sri L. K. Pandey, learned Counsel for the revisionists, Sri V. Singh learned Counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and the learned A. G. A.

(3.) AFTER considering the arguments and the facts of the case I am of the view that totally false complaint has been filed by the opposite party No. 2 in order to harass the revisionist and it is gross misuse of the process of the Court to permit the complainant to proceed. Accordingly the revision is allowed and the summoning order and proceedings of the above case are quashed. Revision allowed. .