SHETHNA, J. - (1.) SHORT submission made by learned counsel Shri Vyas in this petition is that the revisional court committed grave error in allowing revision petition filed by the respondent No. 2 accused after appreciating the evidence on record. He submitted that it was not open for the learned Addl. Sessions Judge to go into the evidence and decide the matter at this stage as to whether the offence is committed by the accused or not. He further submitted that, that is not the scope of Section 397 Cr. P. C.
(2.) THE aforesaid submission of learned counsel Shri Vyas for the petitioner has to be appreciated in the background of few relevant facts of the case, which are as under:- It was alleged by the petitioner in his FIR that on 25. 3. 1993 at 8 p. m. the respondent No. 2 accused physically assaulted him inside his house and abuse him with his caste, thereby, he committed offence under Sections 323, 451 and 504 I. P. C. and under Section 3 of the SC/st (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. After completing the investigation, final report was submitted on 13. 4. 1993 by the police. But on an application made by the petitioner, CID (C. B.) was ordered to conduct the investigation which has also submitted final report on 2. 12. 1993. However, on a protest petition submitted by the petitioner before the learned trial Magistrate, the learned Magistrate passed the order taking cognizance against the respondent No. 2 under Sections 323, 451 and 504 I. P. C. and also under Section 3 of the SC/st Act and ordered to issue arrest warrant against the accused on 26. 3. 1996. The aforesaid order of learned trial Magistrate was challenged by the respondent No. 2 by way of revision before the Sessions Court, which was allowed by the learned Addl. District and Sessions Judge, No. 1, Bikaner by his judgment and order dated 21. 5. 98 as he was of the opinion that prima facie no case was made out against the respondent accused either for the offence under Section 341 or 323 I. P. C. Learned Sessions Judge was also of the opinion that the investigation was carried out by Superintendent of Police, Bikaner and in the investigation it was found that accused never abused the petitioner complainant by his caste and that false complaint was filed by the petitioner complainant against the respondent accused only with a view to harass him and his family members for the reasons that there was a delay on the part of petitioner complainant in getting the clothes of respondent No. 2 stitched. In case of Smt. Nagawwa vs. Veeranna Shivalingappa Konjalgi and Others (1), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has laid down that in following cases the order of Magistrate issuing process against the accused can be quashed or set aside:- (i) Where the allegations made in the complaint or the statement of the witnesses recorded in support of the same taken at their face value make out absolutely no case against the accused or the complaint does not disclose the essential ingredients of an offence which is alleged against the accused; (ii) Where the allegations made in the complaint are patently absurd and inherently improbable so that no prudent person can ever reach a conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceedings against the accused; (iii) Where there is no evidence or material is wholly irrelevant or totally; inadmissible; and (iv) Where the complaint suffers from fundamental legal defects, such as, want of sanction, or absence of a complaint by legally competent authority, etc. From the record of the case and the order passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, it is clear that instant case falls in the aforesaid category No. 2 as allegation made in the complaint by the complainant were patently absurd and inherently improbable for which not one but two investigating agencies submitted final report in favour of respondent accused.
(3.) UNDER the circumstances, when the revisional court had exercised its revisional jurisdiction then this Court would not interfere with such order in its powers under Section 482 Cr. P. C. In view of the above discussion, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed. .;