BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED COMPANY Vs. MALIK MUSHTAQ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have challenged order dtd. 10/9/2015 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pulwama, whereby learned Sessions Judge has set aside order dtd. 17/8/2015 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Pampore.

(2.) It appears that the respondent herein had filed a complaint against the petitioners alleging commission of offences under Ss. 406, 418, 420, 109 and 120-B RPC. The aforesaid complaint came to be dismissed by the learned trial Magistrate vide his order dtd. 17/8/2015 on the ground that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused/petitioners. The aforesaid order came to be challenged by the respondent/ complainant by way of a revision petition before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Pulwama. Vide the impugned order dtd. 10/9/2015, the learned Sessions Judge set aside the order of the learned trial Magistrate and remanded the case back to the learned trial Magistrate with a direction to proceed afresh and pass order in accordance with the provisions of law. It is this order, which is under challenge before this Court by way of instant petition.

(3.) It has been contended that the impugned order dtd. 10/9/2015 passed by learned Sessions Judge is illegal and bad in the eyes of law, inasmuch as the transaction between the respondent/complainant and the petitioners is purely of civil nature and if at all the respondent had any grievance, he could have approached a Civil Court or a Consumer Redressal Forum. It has been further contended that the allegations made in the complaint do not disclose commission of offence under Sec. 420 of RPC or any other offence against the petitioners and, as such, it was not open to the learned Revisioanl Court to set the criminal law into motion against the petitioners by quashing the order of the learned trial Magistrate.