SALETE MIRANDA E SHETTY Vs. PRAMOD FATERPEKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the revisional order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mapusa whereby the learned Judge set aside the order of the learned Magistrate dismissing a complaint and directed issuance of process against the applicants for the offences punishable under Sections 380 and 427 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Facts which are material for deciding this revision are as under :-

(3.) The complainant then filed Criminal Revision Application No.72 of 2004 which was allowed by order dated 15/01/2005 directing the learned Magistrate either to proceed under Section 156(3) or Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This order was passed without hearing the applicants. The complainant seems to have then applied for transfer of the Criminal complaint from one Court to another which application too was allowed without hearing the applicants. On 01/09/2006, the learned Magistrate to whom the case was transferred referred the matter for investigation to the police. On 01/07/2007, the police inspector filed his report. The complainant expired on 05/03/2008 and the complaint is now sought to be prosecuted by one Mr.Nilkanth Narvekar. On 07/05/2009 and 25/06/2009, two witnesses were examined before the Court. On 06/08/2009, the learned Magistrate again dismissed the complaint holding that there was not enough material to issue process. Aggrieved thereby, one Pravina Pramod Faterpekar i.e. widow of the original complainant filed a revision which revision was allowed by the impugned order.