MANI RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS miscellaneous petition is directed against the order of learned Additional Distt and Sessions. Judge, Nohar dated 27. 11. 87 whereby the order directing investigation passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Nohar dated 9. 11. 87 was affirmed.

(2.) BRIEF facts giving rise to this petition are that on 30. 10. 87 one Rajendra Singh moved an application with the allegation that on 29. 10. 87, the process server with the help of Ramdayal got the notice served, to some other person, instead of him. It was alleged that the verification was made by Maniram, Pusaram and Redram that Rajendra Singh has refused to take notice in their presence which were issued for 30. 10. 87 by the court in a injunction suit along with application filed by Kana Ram and others against Rajendra Singh. The learned Magistrate, confronted the process server Anoop Singh, who has admitted that in fact notices were not served on Rajendra Singh s/o Amra Ram but to some other person. On this learned Magistrate issued direction for investigation against 4 persons for the offence u/s. 419, 467, 120-B IPC by the order dated 9. 11. 87. On appeal, the same was dismissed by learned ADJ by the order dated 27. 11. 87. Hence this petition.

(3.) IT is clear from the perusal of section 190 Cr. P. C, that before taking cognizance the Magistrate can ask for investigation to the police under section 156 (3) Cr. P. C