LAXMAN SINGH Vs. RAMSEWAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY preferring the present petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the petitioners seek quashment of the order dated 1st April 2010 in Cri.Rev.No. 215/2009 passed by the Fourth Additional Sessions Judge Bhind (M.P.) whereunder their revision was dismissed confirming the order of the trial Magistrate dated 21st August 2009 in Criminal Case No. 451/09, taking cognizance and issuing processes against the petitioners.

(2.) THE facts, in short, just for the adjudication of the case are that there was a matrimonial dispute between the daughter of petitioner No. 2, namely, Smt. Mamta and her husband Ram Sewak Narwaria (respondent herein), which resulted in filing complaints by both of them against each other. It is stated that the respondent filed complaint against the petitioners being related to his wife Mamta before the JMFC Mehgaon district Bhind. The trial Magistrate after recording the statement of complainant under Section 200 Cr.P.C and his witnesses under Section 202 Cr.P.C. and upon perusal of the police report, dismissed the complaint under Section 203 of Cr.P.C. The complainant Ram Sewak, being aggrieved by the order of dismissal of JMFC Mehgaon filed the Criminal Revision before the Court of Sessions. The Revisional Court by allowing the revision petition set aside the order of dismissal passed by the trial Magistrate and remanded the criminal complaint for fresh consideration and pass an appropriate order as per law. The trial Magistrate in compliance of the directions of the revisional court heard the complainant and by an order dated 21st August 2009, took cognizance and issued process against the petitioners. Same order was challenged by the accused-petitioners in the instant revision which came to be dismissed by the court vide impugned order dated 1/4/10, hence this petition.

(3.) PER contra, supporting the order dated 21th August 09 in Complaint Case No.451/09 of the trial Magistrate as well as the order dated 1st April 2010 in Criminal Revision No. 215/2009 of the revisional court, learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that previously the complaint of the respondent was dismissed by the trial Magistrate without assigning any reason. Because the trial Magistrate passed the erroneous order, without consideration of the evidence, dismissing complaint of the respondent, the revision was preferred against that order, which was allowed remanding the matter back to the court concerned. It is submitted that upon direction of the revisional court, the trial Magistrate rightly considered the complaint and evidence and thereafter took cognizance of the offence and issued the process against the petitioners. Under such circumstances, it is submitted that the petition of the petitioners is liable to dismissed.