TRIMBAK Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel and learned A.P.P. for respective parties.

(2.) BY this petition, the petitioners impugn judgment rendered by learned Sessions Judge, Latur, in Criminal Revision Application No. 73/2003.

(3.) CLINCHING question is whether the present petitioners are adversely affected by the impugned order. It is well settled that unless a person is summoned to appear as an accused, he/she will not get any right to agitate any question shown in the criminal case. The person who is not summoned by the Criminal Court has no locus, whatsoever, to ventilate his grievances about the proceedings which do not affect his rights. The petition does not show as to how rights of the petitioners are affected adversely. It is probable that the learned Magistrate may, on reconsideration of the material, again accept the report of the police investigation, or may call upon the complainant to produce certain more material to substantiate the complaint. Whatever may be done by the learned Magistrate, would not touch the petitioners unless they are adversely affected by any order of issuance of process. If the order of issuance of process is rendered against them, then they may be at liberty to challenge the same. In other words, present petition is premature and is liable to be dismissed.