- (1.) This criminal misc. writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the prayer to quash the orders dated 12.7.2012 passed by X Addl. Sessions Judge, Varanasi and the order dated 18.2.2011 passed by II Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi and the entire complaint case initiated against the petitioners on the basis of the complaint filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate by opposite party No.5.
(2.) The brief facts of the case are that opposite party No.5 filed an application dated 23..4.2010 under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate II, Varanasi who treated the same as a complaint after calling for a report from the police station Shivpur Varanasi. Such report is annexure-VI to the affidavit. The facts mentioned in the complaint are that opposite party No.5 is the elected Dy. Manager of Amar Shahid Inter College, Ayar Varanasi and he holds such post since last 17 years. Due to death of ex-manager Ram Dular Mishra opposite party no.5 was discharging the duties of the manager of the said educational institution. It has also been mentioned in the complaint that petitioner no.1 in connivance with the other petitioners formed a group and in an illegal manner a meeting of the management committee was called and a bogus resolution was passed. Such resolution has been alleged to be illegal and has been passed by adopting wrong procedure. It has been shown in the proceedings-register that certain office bearers and members of the committee were present in the meeting but it is factually incorrect. Most of the members were not present in the meeting and their signatures were forged. It has also been alleged that one Rakesh Kumar Gupta had died in the year 2007 but his signature finds a place in the proceedings of the meeting. It has further been submitted that the signature of one Lok Nath Singh was there despite the fact that he ceased to be a member of the society 3 years ago. It has also been submitted that no such meeting ever took place. Infact the petitioners had assembled at a place and they forged the proceedings in the register. It has also been mentioned in the complaint that such information was given to the district inspector of schools but under influence of the petitioners he did not take any action in the matter. After filing of the complaint the learned magistrate recorded the statement of opposite party No.5 under section 200 Cr.P.C. on 20.7.2010. One Jag Narain Pandey was examined under section 202 Cr.P.C. and on 7.8.2010 another witness Jitendra @ Anil Singh was also examined by the learned magistrate during the course of inquiry. Thereafter, after hearing opposite party No.5 the magistrate summoned all the petitioners vide his order dated 18.2.2011 under sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and directed them to appear before him to face trial.
(3.) Feeling aggrieved by such summoning order a criminal revision was field in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Varanasi being Criminal Revision No.141 of 2011 which was ultimately decided by X Addl. Sessions Judge, Varanasi on 12.7.2012. Learned X Addl. Sessions Judge dismissed the revision. Hence the present petition is here.;