JAGDISH PRASAD Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal misc. petition has been filed by the accused-petitioners challenging the order dated 12.10.1999 whereby cognizance had been taken against them by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) & Judicial Magistrate, Laxmangarh, District Sikar, for the offences under Section 143, 448 and 380 read with 149 IPC. Being aggrieved of the said order the accused-petitioners filed a revision petition before the learned Sessions Court and the same came to be dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Sikar on 19.1.2001.

(2.) Briefly, the facts of the case are that there was dispute between the parties with regard to a residential house situated at village Naichwa, District Sikar. Subsequently, it gave rise to civil and criminal litigation between the parties. The complainant-respondent then filed a report with regard to an incident of 17.1.96, before the police on 16.2.1996 on which a regular F.I.R. came to be registered (13/96) on 19.2.1996 for the offences under Section 448 & 379 IPC. On completion of the investigation, the police filed a final report (9/96 on 4.3.1996 holding no such incident had taken place (adamvakua). The complainant-respondent had on 13.8.96 submitted a protest petition before the concerning Magistrate. After hearing both the parties, the learned Magistrate passed an order on 20.8.1996, whereby he had accepted the final report and dismissed the protest petition. Being aggrieved of the said order of the Magistrate, the complainant-respondent filed a revision petition before the learned Sessions Court, Sikar which came to be transferred to the court of Additional Sessions Judge No. 1 Sikar (No. 13/96) and the same was dismissed on 13.8.98.

(3.) Meanwhile, the complainant-respondent had filed a complaint before the court of learned Magistrate on 3.9.1996. After recording the statement of the complainant and his witnesses on 14.11.1996 and 26.11.1996, learned Magistrate then took cognizance against the petitioners by his order dated 12.10.1999 and called them through non bailable warrants. Being aggrieved of the said order passed by the learned Magistrate the accused petitioners filed a revision petition which was registered as revision petition No. 86/99. The learned revisional court dismissed the revision petition and affirmed the order of cognizance passed by the learned Magistrate on 19.1.2001. Hence, this misc. petition has been filed before this court.