DURGA DATT Vs. VIJAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE relevant facts for the disposal of this petition are that respondents were summoned by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Narwana to face trial under Sections 342, 506 read with Section 34 IPC. The respondents appeared before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate on 3.2.1999 and were released on bail on their furnishing personal bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety in the like amount. Respondent No. 2 stood surety for respondent No. 1 and submitted that surety bond, which was accepted and attested by the learned Magistrate. In the surety bond, respondent No. 2 showed himself as resident of Mohalla Niwaz Nagar, Narnaul whereas in fact, he was resident of some other Mohalla. Respondent No. 1 executed the personal bond in the name of Vijay Singh, whereas his name was Vijay Kumar.

(2.) PETITIONER moved application before the learned Chef Judicial Magistrate Ist Class under Section 340 Cr.P.C. for initiating Criminal Proceedings against the respondents. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate dismissed the application vide order dated 11.2.2000. Against that order, petitioner filed a revision before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Narnaul, which was also dismissed vide order dated 30.10.2000.

(3.) AFTER hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, I am of the opinion that there is no illegality or irregularity in the impugned orders.