RAMRATI DEVI Vs. TATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD , learned counsel for the petitioner, opposite parties 2 to 6 and the State and with their consent this application is being disposed of at the stage of admission itself.

(2.) THE petitionercomplainant has impugned the order of the learned Magistrate dated 12.6.2000 by reason of which he has dismissed the complaint petition. Before going to the facts in nutshell, it is pertinent to mention that on 10.1.2001 the petitioners counsel with reference to paragraphs 6 and 7 of the petition made a grievance that without giving any opportunity to the witnesses of the complainant to be examined the learned Magistrate dismissed the complaint on the same day when the complainant was examined on solemn affirmation. On this submission being made I called for a report from the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. Nawadah and pursuant to that a report dated 23.1.2001 has been received. From perusal of the report it appears that the complaint petition was filed on 9.5.2000 but on the ground of ailment of the complainant a prayer was made to adjourn the case and the same was allowed by adjourning the case to 12.6.2000 for examination of the complainant. On 12.6.2000 the complainant was examined on solemn affirmation and no other witnesses were in attendance on that date and, therefore, final order was passed on the same day dismissing the complaint petition.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner could not point out before the Court as to whether on 12.6.2000 the complainant after her examination on solemn affirmation filed any petition before the learned Magistrate to adjourn the case to another date in order to examine her other witnesses. Thus, in my view, the submission made on behalf of the petitioner that no opportunity was given to examine her witnesses has no substance.