SYED RASOOL AND SONS Vs. AILDAS AND COMPANY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two criminal petitions are filed under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code for quashing C.C. No. 143 of 1992, on the file of XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad, and C.C. No. 481 of 1991, on the file of the II Additional Munsif-Magistrate, Tirupathi.

(2.) The accused in C.C. No. 143 of 1992, on the file of the XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad, are the petitioners in Criminal Petition No. 689 of 1992, while the accused in C.C. No. 481 of 1991, on the file of the II Additional Munsif-Magistrate, Tirupathi, is the petitioner in Criminal Petition No. 967 of 1992. Respondent No. 1 in both the criminal petitions are the complaints in C.C. No. 143 of 1992 and C.C. No. 481 of 1991, respectively.

(3.) These petitions have come up for hearing before this Bench on a reference made by our learned brother, Iyyapu Panduranga Rao J., in Criminal Petition No. 967 of 1992, and by one of us (i.e., G. Radhakrishna Rao J.) in Criminal Petition No. 689 of 1992.