VIJENDRA SHARMA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Vinay Saran learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. and Sri D. S. Tiwari learned counsel for the respondent No. 2.

(2.) This petition has been filed against the order dated 28-6-2002 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Chhata, Mathura in Criminal Case No. 27 of 2000, whereby cognizance was taken by the learned Magistrate and the petitioners were summoned to face the trial for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act and the judgment and order dated 21-10-2003 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 4, Mathura in Criminal Revision No. 214 of 2002 whereby the revision filed by the petitioners was dismissed.

(3.) It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that one Rameshwar the father of Smt. Vimlesh the respondent No. 2 lodged an F.I.R. against the petitioners on 7-12-1999 in case crime No. 301 of 1999 under Section 498-A and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P. S. Chhata, district Mathura, which was investigated by the police, thereafter, the I.O. came to conclusion that the petitioners were falsely implicated in the case, therefore final report was submitted by the I.O. in the Court in favour of the petitioners. Against that final report Rameshwar the father of the respondent No. 2 filed protest petition dated 17-5-2000. That protest petition was treated as complaint by the learned Magistrate on 12-2-2002 and Rameshwar the father of the respondent No. 2 was directed to appear before the Court for recording his statement under Section 200, Cr.P.C. The statements of Rameshwar and the witnesses namely Smt. Vimlesh respondent No. 2, Deen Dayal and Tej Ram were recorded under Sections 200 and 202, Cr.P.C. After recording the statements of the Rameshwar and above named witnesses the learned Judicial Magistrate took the cognizance and summoned the petitioners on 28-G-2002 to face the trial for the offences punishable under Section 498-A, I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act. Against this order the petitioners have filed Criminal Revision No. 214 of 2002, which was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 4, Mathura on 21-10-2003.