GARG, J. - (1.) THIS criminal revision petition under section 397 r/w 401 Cr. P. C. has been filed by the petitioner- complainant against the order dated 8. 2. 2001 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Jodhpur in Criminal Case No. 165/99 by which he rejected the protest petition filed by the petitioner-complainant for taking cognizance against the respondents for the offences under Sections 420, 468 and 120b IPC.
(2.) THE facts giving rise to this criminal revision petition are as follows:- THE petitioner-complainant filed a complaint in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Jodhpur on 11. 6. 1999 against the respondents for the offence under sections 420, 468 and 120b IPC and the same was sent to Police Station Shastri Nagar, Jodhpur under Section 156 (3) Cr. P. C. for investigation, where FIR No. 165/99 was registered. After usual investigation, the police submitted FR No. 96/99 in that FIR holding inter-alia:- 1. That no interpolation is made in the record. 2. That Civil Court has passed the temporary injunction in favour of the accused respondents. 3. That the matter has been compounded by the UIT. When the petitioner-complainant was informed about the submission of FR by the police, he filed a protest petition before the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Jodhpur with the prayer that cognizance be taken against the respondents for the offence under Sections 420, 468 and 120b IPC. The said protest petition was rejected by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Jodhpur vide order dated 8. 2. 2001. Aggrieved from the said order dated 8. 2. 2001 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Jodhpur, the present criminal revision petition has been filed by the petitioner-complainant. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner- complainant. The learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 1 Jodhpur vide order dated 8. 2. 2001 accepted the FR submitted by the police and rejected the protest petition filed by the petitioner- complainant. After perusing the impugned order dated 8. 2. 2001, it does not appear that it suffers from any irregularity or illegality; it is based on correct appreciation of facts. The learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate has given so many cogent reasons in coming to the conclusion that the view taken by the police in submitting FR is correct one.
(3.) APART from this, when the question of possession has been decided by the competent civil court as it has happened in the present case, parallel criminal proceedings should not be allowed to continue. From this point of view also, the order passed by the police in submitting the FR as well as the impugned order passed by the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Jodhpur in accepting the FR submitted by the police and rejecting the protest petition of the petitioner-complainant do not suffer from any infirmity. Hence, there is no force in this revision petition filed by the petitioner-complainant and the same is hereby dismissed. .;