SURAJBHAN SINGH Vs. TEJ KANWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this miscellaneous petition under Section 482 Cr.PC the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 3, Jaipur City, Jaipur dated 6th November, 1984, has been challenged mainly on the ground that the learned Additional Sessions Judge, did not take into consideration the provisions of Section 68 of Cr.PC in holding that the services of the summons of the case, under Section 125 Cr.PC was proper. It is also urged that if the service of the summons under Section 125 Cr.PC is not in accordance with the law, then an application to set aside the ex parte order, if any made under the proviso to Sub -section (2) of Section 126 Cr.PC cannot be dismissed on the ground that the same came to be made after 3 months from the date of the ex parte order.

(2.) THE parties are not in dispute that the summons which were issued on the petitioner of the application under Section 125 Cr.PC which was moved by Smt. Tej Kanwar, in the court of the learned Magistrate, were not served on the petitioner in accordance with Section 68 of the Cr. PC. No doubt, there was dispute between the parties on the fact of actual service.

(3.) AN application to set aside the order was made on 10th August, 1983, after the period of 90 days prescribed in the proviso to Sub -section (1) of Section 125 Cr.PC which was accompanied by the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The learned Magistrate, dismissed the application. A revision petition was filed by the petitioner which was dismissed.