SURJIT KAUR Vs. SURJIT KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have sought the quashing of the orders dated August 6, 1986 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhatinda, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short called the Act).

(2.) THE relevant facts are that the respondent Surjit Kaur filed a criminal complaint against a number of persons, including the petitioners, under. Sections 494 and 109 read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code. The trial Magistrate, vide an order dated January 24, 1985, summoned the petitioners and the other accused under Section 494 read with Section 109, Indian Penal Code. The petitioners questioned the summoning order by filing a revision petition which was heard by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhatinda. The latter dismissed the revision by means of the impugned order dated August 6, 1986 on the ground that revision against the order of summoning was not maintainable.

(3.) THUS , in the light of the view taken by the Supreme Court in the case of Amar Nath (supra) the order of summoning of the accused in a complaint case must be held to be revisable. Consequently, the impugned order of the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhatinda, is set aside and the learned Judge is directed to decide the revision petition, filed by the petitioner against the order of trial Magistrate dated January 24, 1985 on merits. The parties have been directed to appear before the revisional Court on March 30, 1987. 1. 1977 C.L.R. (S.C.) 242. 2. A.I.R. 1980 S.C. 962.