NIRMAL SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner filed instant criminal misc. petition, assailing the order dtd. 12/1/2010 passed in revision petition No. 144/2009 by the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 3, Jaipur City, Jaipur, dismissing his revision petition and affirming the order dtd. 1/12/2005 in case No. 5337/2007 passed by the Judicial Magistrate No. 11, Jaipur (City), Smt. Chanda Devi Vs. Nirmal Singh, whereby cognizance for offence under Sec. 447 IPC has been taken against the petitioner.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that the cognizance has been taken on the criminal complaint filed by non-petitioner No. 2 Smt. Chanda Devi on 5/10/2005. Whereas prior to that non-petitioner No. 2 filed one more complaint, which was sent for investigation to Police under Sec. 156 (3) Cr.P.C. and after investigation, Police submitted negative final report, which was accepted by the Judicial Magistrate. Hence, on the similar set of facts, the cognizance taken in the second complaint, stands illegal and contrary to the mandate of law.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the complainant as well as learned Public Prosecutor opposed the petition.