RAFIQUE ABDUL MALIK MALIK MALIK Vs. BIPIN Z/O REVANDAS PATEL KABDUL HAMEED S O LATE ABDUL KHALIQUE OM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A small point arises for adjudication and that is, what is the effect of the act of Court in not taking cognizance of a complaint presented before it in respect of some accused mentioned in the said complaint against whom Court does not pass the order of issuing process, qua the offences indicated in the complaint.

(2.) A complaint was filed by respondent No. 1 against the present petitioners and some other persons in a Criminal Court, which was numbered as Criminal Case No. 108/1990. On 5th of June 1990 the process was issued against original accused No. 1 and 2 mentioned in the complaint and the complaint was dismissed against present petitioners. Thereafter on 5th of July, 2000 the said complaint was dismissed for default as complainant and his officers were absent. The said complainant, present respondent No. 1, filed another complaint, which was numbered as Criminal Complaint No. 193/2001. In the matter of this complaint the learned Magistrate directed the concerned police station to investigate into the allegations made in the said complaint in view of provisions of Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Code for convenience) and that order has been put to challenge.

(3.) SHRI Deshpande submitted that though the process was issued against other accused in view of offence indicated by provisions of Section 420 r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, the present petitioners will have to be treated to have been acquitted in respect of the said complaint and therefore, they cannot be now against tried on the same allegations for the same offences in view of provisions of Section 300 of Code and Article 20 of Constitution of India. He submitted that the said order directing concerned police station to make investigation in the present case in view of provisions of Section 156 (3,4) needs to be quashed.