SRI RAJIB BARUAH Vs. MAJIBUDDIN AHMED AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WITH the help of this application, made under Section 482, Cr PC, the petitioner, who is accused in Complaint Case No. A 64 C/2008, pending in the Court of learned Sub -Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Rangiya, has sought for setting aside and quashing the order, dated 27.11.2008, whereby the learned Magistrate has, upon taking the view that a prima facie case, under Section 420, IPC, has been made out, directed to issue summons against the accused for his appearance. The case of the complainant is, in brief, thus :

(2.) I have heard Mr. A. Sharma, Learned Counsel, for the accused -petitioner, and Ms. D. Buragohain, Learned Counsel, for the complainant -opposite party. I have also heard Mr. D. Das, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam.

(3.) IF one keeps the provisions of Section 200, Cr PC in mind, it becomes abundantly clear that the purpose of examination of the complainant and his witnesses present, if any, is obviously to determine not the veracity or otherwise of the allegations made in the complaint, but to determine as to how far the allegations, made in the complaint, are supported by the statements, which may be recorded under Section 200, Cr PC. If the Magistrate finds that the statements, so made, are sufficient to issue process against one or more accused, there is no impediment, on his part, in issuing process in exercise of his power under Section 204, Cr PC, which provides that if in the opinion of the Magistrate taking cognizance of offence, there is sufficient ground for proceeding and the case appears to be a summons case, he shall issue summons for attendance of the accused or, if the case appears to be a warrant case, he may issue a warrant or, if he thinks fit, a summons, for causing the accused to be brought or to appear at a certain time before such Magistrate or, if he has no jurisdiction himself, some other Magistrate having jurisdiction.