AJAY KUMAR RANA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ORDER :- This application under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short 'the Code') is directed against the judgment dated 2-12-1998 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Nawadah in Cr. Revision No. 67/98 by which while allowing this revision case he set aside the order dated 24-4-1998 passed by Shri Ramashray, Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Nawada, whereby the learned Magistrate has been pleased to order for issuing summons against opposite party Nos. 2 to 6 under Section 319 of the Code.

(2.) From the facts of the case it appears that the petitioner had filed a complaint case (Complaint Case No. 439/96) against the aforesaid persons as also against one Satyadeo Prasad. In the complaint petition he had alleged that these persons in conspiracy with each other had created a forged and fabricated document purported to be "Yaddast" said to be executed by one Ratan Ram, son of Meghu Ram. After an enquiry under Section 192 of the Code the cognizance of offence was, however, taken by the learned Magistrate only against the accused Satyadeo Prasad. After recording of the evidence of four witnesses before framing of the charge the petitioner had filed a petition in the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate to summon opposite party Nos. 2 to 6 under the provisions of Section 319 of the Code. The evidence of four witnesses examined before the charge disclosed that all the accused persons including opposite party Nos. 2 to 6 had conspired together and had manufactured forged documents. The learned Magistrate on the consideration of the evidence on record and the defence put up by the accused Satyadeo Prasad was pleased to order for the issue of summons against opposite party Nos. 2 to 6 under the provisions of Section 319 of the Code.

(3.) Being aggrieved by this order these persons preferred a revision petition (Cr. Revision No. 67/98) before the learned Sessions Judge, Nawadah who by his order dated 2-12-1998 set aside the order of the learned Magistrate for issuing summons against opposite party Nos. 2 to 6. It is against this order that the present revision application has been filed.