KHEM CHAND SHARMA, J. - (1.) THESE three revision petitions by petitioner Vinod Baid involve more or less similar facts and an identical question of law, therefore, they are being disposed of by a common order.
(2.) IN all these revision petitions, the petitioner has challenged the orders taking cognizance of the offence under Sections 420 and 406, IPC. In Cr. Revision No. 140/2002, a complaint was filed against the petitioner on 26.11.1997 and the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate vide its order dated 1.4.1998 sent the complaint under Section 156(3), CrPC to the concerned police station for investigation. There -upon, FIR was registered on 4.4.1998 and the police after investigation submitted negative report. On a notice having been issued, the complainant Vishnu Swaroop Baldeva filed a protest petition on 2.5.2002 and the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance of the offence.
(3.) IN Cr. Revision No. 138/2002, a complaint was filed by complainant Narain Singh against the petitioner on 3.4.2000 and the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate vide its order dated 5.4.2000 sent the complaint under Section 156(3), CrPC to the concerned police station for investigation. There -upon, FIR was registered on 17.4.2000 and the police after investigation submitted negative report on 19.8.2000. On a notice having been issued, the complainant filed protest petition on 28.2.2001 and the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, on 28.7.2001 ordered that the protest petition be registered as complaint, and ultimately, vide its order dated 21.9.2001 took cognizance of the offence.;