MAM CHAND Vs. KESHO RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 227 read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed against the order dated 8.4.2011 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Sirmaur District at Nahan in Criminal Revision No. 18-Cr.R./10 of 2009 reversing the order dated 17.9.2009 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sirmaur District at Nahan in Cr. Complaint No. 61/1 of 2007. The facts, in brief, are that petitioner had filed a complaint under Section 500 IPC against the respondent No. 1. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate on 6.3.2007 issued process to respondent No. 1 under Section 500 IPC. The notice of accusation was put on 12.9.2007. On 7.11.2007 the respondent No. 1 filed an application under Section 258 Cr.P.C. for dropping the proceedings against respondent No. 1 as no cognizance of the offence could have been taken by the Court after the expiry of three years w.e.f. 5.8.2002. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate on 17.9.2009 dismissed the application under Section 258 Cr.P.C., on the ground that Section 258 Cr.P.C. is applicable to a summons case instituted otherwise than upon a complaint. The case does not fall within the purview of Section 258 Cr.P.C. The order dated 17.9.2009 was challenged before the learned Sessions Judge in revision, who on 8.4.2011 allowed the revision and set-aside the order dated 17.9.2009, hence petition under Article 227 read with Section 482 Cr.P.C.

(2.) Heard and perused the record. It has been submitted by the learned Counsel for respondent No. 1 that the learned Sessions Judge has rightly appreciated the material on record. The scandalous news item was published on 13.8.2002. The complaint was filed on 11.1.2007 after the expiry of three years. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate erred in issuing the process to respondent No. 1, hence no fault can be found with the impugned order. The learned Counsel for respondent No. 1 has relied Ramesh Chandra Sinha and others v. State of Bihar and others, 2003 7 SCC 254 and Bharat Damodar Kale and another v. State of A.P., 2003 8 SCC 559.

(3.) The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate issued the process to respondent No. 1 on 6.3.2007 and thereafter notice of accusation was also put to respondent No. 1 on 12.9.2007. The respondent No. 1 on 7.11.2007 filed an application under Section 258 Cr.P.C. for stopping further proceedings in the case with the prayer to discharge the respondent No. 1. The order dated 6.3.2007 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has not been specifically prayed to be recalled in the application under Section 258 Cr.P.C. nor there is any reference to order dated 12.9.2007 in the said application.