MAL CHAND BAGRECHA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the instant criminal misc. petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. the judgment and order dated 15.9.2007 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Churu (for short the Revisional Court' hereinafter) in Criminal Revision No. 138 of 2004 has been challenged whereby the revision petition filed by the respondent No. 2 Narain Chand against the order dated 15.10.2004 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Sardarshahar (for short the Trial Court' hereinafter) dismissing the application filed by respondent No. 2 seeking to drop the proceedings, was allowed.

(2.) I have heard learned Counsel for the parties.

(3.) It appears that the proceedings were initiated in the year 1998 by way of filing a complaint by the petitioner against respondent Narain Chand for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short the Act' hereinafter). Thereafter, the Trial Court took the cognizance of the offence and proceeded with the complaint case. When the matter came up for evidence of complainant, at that stage, an application was filed by respondent No. 2 Narain Chand dated 21.7.2004 seeking to recall the order taking cognizance and dropping the proceedings. That application came to the dismissed by order dated 15.10.2004 by the Trial Court, against which, the respondent No. 2 filed a revision petition and the Revisional Court allowed the revision petition relying on a decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 1992 CrLR (SC) 677, K.M. Mathew v. State of Kerala. According to learned Counsel for the petitioner, the decision in K.M. Mathew's case has been overruled by Three Judges Bench decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Adalat Prasad v. Rooplal Jindal and others, JT 2004 (7) SC 243 : 2006 (2) NIJ 596 (SC).