Raj Mani Chauhan, J. - (1.) Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A for the State as well as perused the documents available on record.
(2.) This petition under Sec. Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as Code) has been filed by the petitioners against the order dated 27.08.2008, passed by the learned Additional District Judge/FTC -II, Court No. 11, Sultanpur in Criminal Revision No. 219 of 2008; Mahendra Pratap Singh v/s. State of U.P., whereby the learned Additional District Judge has allowed the revision and set aside the order dated 17.2.2008, passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sultanpur in Complaint No. 1457 of 2008 and remanded the matter back to the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sultanpur with a direction to pass afresh order after giving due opportunity of hearing to the complainant -revisionist. The learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate on the basis of order passed by the learned Additional District Judge has summoned the accused petitioners, vide order dated 3.5.2010. The petitioners have prayed for quashing the summoning order.
(3.) The facts giving rise to the present petition in brief are that the opposite party No. 2 Mahendra Pratap Singh filed a complaint before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 18, Sultanpur against the accused -petitioners and others inter -alia with the allegation that the accused Shiv Bhushan Mishra (petitioner) who was a man of criminal nature and was a junior teacher became lecturer in Janta Inter College situated in Village Belahari, Police Station Motigarpur, District Sultanpur by manipulation. He also became the Acting Principal of the College. He illegally appointed Sanjay Kumar Tripathi, Santosh Kumar Dubey and Surendra Kumar as Class IV employee of the College. The learned Magistrate recorded the statement of the complainant under Sec. of the Code and the statements of witnesses, namely, Kesh Narain Singh as P.W.1 and Prathipal Singh as P.W.2 under Sec. of the Code and on the basis of statements of the complainant and the witnesses, he found that no, prima -facie, case was being made out against the accused petitioners, consequently, he dismissed the complaint vide order dated 17.2.2008. The complainant being aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate filed a Criminal Revision No. 219 of 2008 before the learned Sessions Judge, Sultanpur which was allowed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge/ FTC -II, Court No. 11, Sultanpur, vide impugned judgment and order dated 27.8.2008 and remanded the matter back to the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate with the direction to pass fresh order after affording an opportunity of hearing to the complainant -revisionist. The learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate in pursuance of the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge thereafter summoned the accused petitioners by impugned order dated 3.5.2010. The accused -petitioners feeling aggrieved by the impugned orders passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate has preferred the present petition under Sec. of the Code.;