(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties. Respondents no. 2 to 5 (original accused) filed application (exhibit 13) before the Judicial Magistrate, FC, Nagpur in Regular Criminal Case No. 670 of 1992 for their discharge. Learned Magistrate rejected that application as against which accused preferred Criminal Revision Application No. 304 of 2000 before the Sessions Judge who by order dated 18th July 2002 allowed the application of accused and discharged them of the offences punishable under Sections 341, 448 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is this order which is subject matter of challenge in this application under Section 482 Cr. P.C.
(2.) Learned counsel for the applicant, inter-alia, contended that application should not have been allowed by the Sessions Judge particularly when charge was about to be framed in the Regular Criminal Case. Main limb of argument is that applicant being complainant on whose complaint accused stood prosecuted, should have been given notice of hearing and since the impugned order is passed without affording opportunity of being heard to the original complainant, the same is non-est and is vitiated. Reliance is placed on M/s J.K. International v. State and ors, 2001 AIR(SC) 1142.
(3.) In M/s J.K. International's case , the Apex Court in paragraph 9 holds thus :