LAXMI ANIL SALGAOCAR Vs. MAHABALESHWAR R HEGDE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALTHOUGH the complaint case filed in the year 2005 is still at a primary stage, where the original complainant has tendered his affidavit in lieu of examination -in -chief, the matter has travelled to this Court twice.

(2.) THE petitioners are the original accused nos. 3 to 6 in a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (the Act, for short), filed by the first respondent. The third and the fourth respondent herein are the original accused nos.1 and 2. That case is pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class at Margao. It appears that the learned Magistrate, by an order dated 11/02/2005, had issued process against the original accused nos.1 and 2. On 30/07/2005, an application came to be filed on behalf of the first respondent for issuance of process against the present petitioners i.e. the accused nos. 3 to 6. That application was allowed by order dated 01/09/2005. The present petitioners filed Criminal Revision Application No.65/2005, before the learned Sessions Judge, challenging the said order, which was allowed by a judgment and order dated 31/01/2007, inter alia, on the ground that the first respondent had not challenged the initial order dated 11/02/2005, whereby process was issued only against the accused nos.1 and 2. The first respondent then sought to challenge the order dated 11/02/2005, by filing a Revision, accompanied by an application for condonation of delay, which was registered as Criminal Miscellaneous Application no.29/2007. However, the learned Sessions Judge, by an order dated 26/11/2007, dismissed the said application, thus, refusing to condone the delay. The first respondent unsuccessfully challenged the said order before this Court in Criminal Revision Application No.20/2008, as this Court dismissed the same, by order dated 17/06/2008. It appears that thereafter, an affidavit in lieu of examination -in -chief came to be filed on behalf of the respondent before the Magistrate on 11/11/2009 and some documents were exhibited on 10/02/2010. Thereafter, an application was filed on behalf of the first respondent, purportedly under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for addition of accused, namely the present petitioners. That application was dismissed by the learned Magistrate on 29/09/2010, against which, the first respondent filed Criminal Revision Application no. 84/2010 before the learned Sessions Judge. The said Criminal Revision Application has been allowed on 08/06/2011, directing issuance of process against the petitioners. That judgment and order is subject matter of challenge in this revision application.

(3.) I have heard Shri A. D. Bhobe, the learned Counsel for the petitioners and Shri S. G. Bhobe, the learned Counsel for the respondent no.1. Perused record.