K.S.SIDHU, J. - (1.) THE application tinder Section 482 Cr. PG has arisen in the following circumstances.
(2.) ONE Inder filed a complaint on February 24, 1976 making an accusation that Gordhan Singh, who will hereinafte b(sic) referred to as the petitioner, had committed rape on his wife Kirandevi, and that one Gioraj had commuted an offence against her punishable under Section 323 and 504 IPC. Toe learned Magistrate forwarded the said complaint to the officer in charge of Police Station Bayana under Section 156(3) Cr. PC for investigation. The investigation by the police into this case ran into some controversy. The Investigating Officer, who was originally entrusted with the investigation, was of opinion than n(sic) officer appears to have been committed by any of the accused persons. Tate opinion was recorded by him on March 15, 1976. The investigation was then transferred to Sub Inspector Hiralal. He was of opinion recorded by him as such on May 11, 1976 that both Gordhan Singh and Girraj had committed the offences alleged against them and that therefore, it was a fir case for forwarding the accused to the court for trial. It appears that on same application by an interested party, the higher authorities of she police assigned the task of she investigation to the Circle Officer, Bayana An Assistant Sub Inspector of police held fresh investigation wader the supervision of the Circle Officer, Bayana In the opinion of the Assistant Sub Inspector of Police the petitioner and Girraj did not appear to have committed any offence. He therefore, recommended the cancellation of opinion given earlier by Sub Inspector Hiralal. He submitted his opinion in writing to the Circle Officer.
(3.) IT appears that the accused persona remained absconding during the investigation. Hiralal, the Investigating Officer, made an application to the Judicial Magistrate First Glass Bayana for taking proceedings under Section 82 and 83 Cr. PC to compel the appearance of the accused. On May 7, 1976, the learned Magistrate allowed the application and directed the issue of necessary proclamation under Section 82 Cr. PC. The proceedings under Section 82 and 83 Cr. PC remained pending before the learned Magistrate for a long time. On May 23, 1977, the learned Magistrate passed an order as a step in aid of the proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 Cr. PC directing the production of the case diary before him. Earlier on May 19, 1977, the complainant Inder made an application to the learned Magistrate which is described as a protest petition for issue of process against the accused persons. The case diary was received by the learned Magistrate from the police on May 31, 1977. He passed an order of even date directing the parties' counsel to adress arguments in the case.;