SHASHA SIPPY Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS both these criminal misc. petitions arise out of the Complaint No. 197/ 98 filed by the respondent and the question involved in them are identical, therefore, they are being decided by a common order.

(2.) THE petitioners, in these petitions, have challenged the order dated 2.7.1999 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Ajmer, whereby he has rejected the objections raised by the accused-petitioners against the order of taking cognizance. Being aggrieved of the said order, the petitioners had filed revision petitions before the learned Sessions Judge, which came to be decided by the Special Judge, SC/ST Court, Ajmer, whereby he had dismissed the same and affirmed the order passed by the learned Magistrate.

(3.) THE said complaint was filed on 7.11.1998. Thereafter, the statement of the complainant was recorded on 10.11.1998. On the basis of the complaint and the evidence on record, the learned Magistrate took cognizance for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, vide his order dated 11.11.1998 and issued process against the accused persons. After appearance before the learned trial Court, through their Counsel, applications were filed on behalf of the accused persons. One such application was moved under Section 204, Cr.PC, on 23.2.1999, raising objections against taking of cognizance. The learned trial Court, after considering their applications, rejected the same, vide its order dated 2.4.1999.