RAM BILASH MISHRA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) M. K. Mittal, J. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 28. 4. 2006 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Basti whereby he dismissed the criminal revision No. 142 of 2006 which was filed against the order dated 6. 2. 2006 passed by Judicial Magistrate in Criminal complaint whereby he had dismissed the complaint under Section,203, Cr. P. C.

(2.) HEARD learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned A. G. A. and perused the material on record.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner has further contended that learned Magistrate has erred in rejecting the evidence of the complainant and his grand son on the ground that they were the accused. This contention has force. Although the complainant and his grand son were accused in the case in which they were arrested but for the purpose of complaint filed by the complainant their testimony could not be rejected on that ground alone. LEARNED Magistrate was required to weigh its veracity and to assess on merits whether it was acceptable and made out any case or not. It is settled position of law that while considering the evidence under Section 200/202, Cr. P. C. it has to be seen whether any prima facie case is made out against the accused to be summoned under Section 204, Cr. P. C. If Magistrate comes to the conclusion that there is sufficient ground to proceed he shall issue summons in summons case and warrant or summons in warrant case. In case learned Magistrate after considering the statement on oath if any of the complainant and of the witnesses and the result of the inquiry or investigation if any under Section 202, Cr. P. C. is of opinion that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding he shall dismiss the complaint recording reasons briefly for so doing. Therefore the Magistrate is to see prima facie sufficient ground for proceedings in the matter and if it is not there only then he can dismiss the complaint.