Sunil Kumar Garg, J. - (1.) This misc. petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners, who are LRs. of Ratanlal (hereinafter referred to as "the deceased") with the prayer that the order dated 26.4.2002 passed by the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No.3, Jodhpur by which the complaint was dismissed by invoking the provisions of Section 256 Cr.P.C. and application of the petitioners dated 4.3.2002 for taking them on record as LRs of deceased was also rejected and further, the order dated 17.6.2002 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No.1, Jodhpur, by which the revision filed by the petitioners was rejected, be quashed and set aside.
(2.) It arises in the following circumstances: On 4.10.1997, deceased Ratanlal lodged a report in the Police Station Khanda Falsa, Jodhpur and on the basis of that report a case for the offences under sections 143, 451 and 323 Indian Penal Code was registered and investigation; the police found that the case was false one and therefore, police submitted FR being No.38/97 in the Court. Thereafter, the deceased complainant filed a protest petition and after considering the protest petition and after giving an opportunity of hearing to the deceased complainant, the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No.3, Jodhpur through order dated 10.1.1999 accepted the FR submitted by the police and rejected the protest petition filed by the deceased complainant. Thereafter, the deceased complainant went in revision against the order dated 10.1.1999 passed by the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No.3, Jodhpur by which FR submitted by the police was accepted and protest petition of the deceased complainant was rejected and that revision being No.9/99 was heard by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No.2, Jodhpur an the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No.2, Jodhpur through order dated 29.6.2000 allowed that revision of the deceased complainant and remanded the matter to the leaned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No.3, Jodhpur with directions to proceed further in the matter. Thereafter, on remand, when the case was listed in the Court of ACJM No.3, Jodhpur on 8.11.2000, neither the deceased complainant nor his counsel was present and therefore, vide order dated 8.11.2000, the complaint filed by the deceased complainant was dismissed by the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No.3, Jodhpur for default. Aggrieved from the said order dated 8.11.2000 passed by the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No.3, Jodhpur, the deceased complainant again filed revision before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No.1, Jodhpur and the leaned Addl. Sessions Judge No.1, Jodhpur through order dated 29.1.2002 allowed that revision and set aside the order dated 8.11.2000 passed by the learned ACJM No.3 Jodhpur and restored the case and remanded the same back to the learned ACJM No.3,Jodhpur with directions to proceed further in the matter. It may be stated here that during the pendency of the complaint, the deceased complainant died on 8.2.2002. Thereafter, on 4.3.2002, the present petitioners, who are LRs of deceased Ratanlal, filed an application with the prayer that since deceased complainant had died on 8.2.2002, therefore, his L.Rs (present petitioners) be substituted as complainants in place of deceased. The said application of the petitioners was rejected by the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No.3, Jodhpur through impugned order dated 26.4.2002 holding inter-alia that under the provisions of Section 256 Cr.P.C. a complaint can be dismissed on the death of the complainant and therefore, he dismissed the complaint and also rejected the application of the petitioners for taking them on record as complainants in place of deceased. Aggrieved from the order dated 26.4.2002 passed by the learned ACJM No.3, Jodhpur, the petitioners preferred revision petition before the learned Sessions Judge, Jodhpur and the same was transferred to the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No.1, Jodhpur, who vide order dated 17.6.2002 rejected the revision of the petitioners and upheld the order of the learned ACJM No.3, Jodhpur dated 26.4.2002. Hence, this misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the prayers as stated above. In this petition, the following submissions have been made by the learned counsel for the petitioners: (i) That the complaint has been wrongly dismissed by the courts below under the provisions of Section 256 Cr.P.C. (ii) That on the death of the deceased complainant, his LRs can be taken on record. Therefore, it was submitted that from both points of view, the impugned orders dated 26.4.2002 passed by the learned ACJM No.3, Jodhpur and 17.6.2002 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No.1, Jodhpur suffer from basic illegality and infirmity and the same deserve to be quashed and set aside.
(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor and gone through the record of the case.;