SURJIT KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BALDEV Singh respondent filed a complaint in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Batala, against the petitioners under Sections 419, 420, 465, 466, 467 and 471, Indian Penal Code, alleging that petitioner No. 3 Girmej Singh had impersonated for him and executed a sale deed in favour of petitioner No. 1 Surjit Kaur. It was further alleged that Jagat Ram and Amar Singh petitioners Nos. 4 and 5 had attested the sale-deed and had conspired to cheat the respondent.

(2.) THIS complaint was dismissed by Shri Hukam Chand, Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Batala, vide his order dated April 24, 1987. The learned Magistrate passed the following order :-

(3.) THE petitioners in this petition have challenged the filing of the second complaint and the registration of the case based on that complaint. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the second complaint is not competent on the same facts and cause of action. According to the learned counsel, when the first complaint was withdrawn and dismissed by the Magistrate, a second complaint on the next day on the same facts and cause of action could not be entertained and as the second complaint was not competent, the consequent registration of the case is also not warranted by law.