(1.) In this petition filed under Sec. 482 Crimial P.C., the petitioner is seeking quashing of the complaint and the summoning order.
(2.) The petitioner claims that the complaint was liable to be quashed on the short ground that on the same set of allegations, the respondent had filed a complaint against the petitioner in which investigation was conducted and the petitioner was found innocent and challan was presented against Harminder Singh and Gurcharan Singh and subsequently on the same set of allegations, the complaint was filed. It was pleaded that the petitioner was unmarried and was working as a Manager in a Pharmaceutical company at Bangalore and she was totally financially independent and had nothing to do with the matrimonial affairs of Harminder Singh. It was pleaded that an application was moved under Sec. 319 Crimial P.C. for summoning the petitioner as additional accused which was dismissed by the trial Court.
(3.) In the reply filed by the private respondent it was pleaded that the trial Court had issued process in the complaint case as it found that prima facie grounds existed for summoning the accused. It was pleaded that the complaint had to be filed since the police had conducted a shoddy investigation and no explanation had been given as to why the petitioner was not challaned and the order passed on the application under Sec. 319 Crimial P.C. was on misreading of facts and the petitioner had failed to avail the remedy of revision and directly filed the petition under Sec. 482 Crimial P.C. It was pleaded that principle of res judicata in criminal cases cannot be invoked. It was pleaded that incomplete challan had been filed and though, the prayer for summoning the additional accused had been declined, there was sufficient evidence.