DIVYA ISHAN Vs. ANTIMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have challenged order dtd. 20/11/2017 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jammu, whereby process has been issued against the petitioners in a complaint filed by the respondent against them alleging commission of offences under Ss. 498-A, 406 and 34 RPC.

(2.) A perusal of the trial court record shows that on 20/5/2017, a complaint was presented before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jammu (Mr. Sunit Gupta) and on the said date preliminary statements of the complainant and her one witness were recorded. The matter was adjourned by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate from time to time and ultimately, on 31/8/2017, the successor-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jammu (Mr. Ashwani Sharma) directed inquiry in terms of Sec. 202 of the Cr. P.C. and postponed issuance of the process. After report of inquiry was received from SHO, Police Station, Gandhi Nagar, Jammu, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate (Mr. Ashwani Sharma) passed another order on 20/11/2017, wherein it was recorded that prima facie offences under Ss. 498-A, 406 and 34 of RPC are made out against the petitioners and accordingly, the process was issued against them.

(3.) The main ground that has been urged by learned counsel for the petitioners for impugning order dtd. 20/11/2017 is that the Magistrate issuing the process against the accused in terms of Sec. 204 of J&K Cr. P.C. which is applicable to the instant case, should be the same Magistrate, who has taken cognizance of the offences in terms of Sec. 200 of the Cr.P.C. It has been submitted that in the instant case, two different Magistrates have undertaken the aforesaid steps in the complaint, as such, the impugned order, whereby the process has been issued against the accused, is unsustainable in law.