MOHD NASEER AHMED Vs. SYED SULTAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Criminal Revision Case under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'Cr.P.C') is filed by the revision petitioners herein challenging the order dated 18.12.2007, passed by the VI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, in C.C.No.1000 of 2007, whereunder and whereby the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the case for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'the I.P.C') and ordered to issue summons against the revision petitioners herein.

(2.) THE revision petitioners herein are A.1 to A.3, whereas respondent No.1 is the complainant in C.C.No.1000 of 2007 before the trial Court. For the sake of convenience, the parties hereinafter will be referred to as they are arrayed in the C.C before the trial Court.

(3.) THE brief facts of the case are that originally, the complainant lodged a private complaint before the IX Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, and the said complaint was registered as a case in Cr.No.188 of 2004 on 21.05.2004. The Investigating Officer after investigating the case, filed a final report dated 16.07.2004, stating that it is a clear case of breach of contract between the parties, who are closely related to each other and the dispute is of civil in nature. After receiving the report, police closed the case. Thereafter, the complainant filed the protest petition stating that the police wrongly closed the case under the influence of the accused persons, without investigating and without recording the statements. After considering the protest petition, the IX Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, passed an order on 06.11.2004 directing the Assistant Commissioner, Asifnagar Police Station, Hyderabad, to depute any other police officer of Asifnagar Police Station to conduct investigation and to file the report. Thereafter, another final report No.42 of 2005 dated 23.05.2005 was filed by the police. In that report, it was stated that the complainant in spite of their best efforts, failed to appear in the police station and not produced any witnesses for examination; that the complainant was not cooperating to investigate the case; and that on 29.01.2005, the complainant came to police station and gave a petition stating that he compromised with the accused, who are his brothers -in -law, and settled the matter amicably and requested to withdraw the case. After filing the final report, the complainant again filed another petition in Crime No.188 of 2004 with the same facts, but added A.3, who is the wife of A.1 as one of the accused. In that petition, the complainant denied the allegation that he failed to cooperate with the Investigating Officer and denied about giving any petition showing the compromise entered between himself and the accused and stated that police as a part of investigation, obtained his signature on some papers and they may have been converted them as petitions for compromise and prayed the Court to issue summons to A.1 to A.3. On 30 th August 2007 and 2 nd November 2007, the statements of PWs.1 and 2 i.e., complainant and his son were recorded by the Magistrate. Thereafter, on 18.12.2007 after hearing the complainant and after perusing the record, the Court held that there is prima face case against A.1 to A.3, taken the case on file for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406 and 506 I.P.C and issued summons against them. Aggrieved by the said order, the present revision case is filed.