A.K.SINGH,J. - (1.) THIS petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been field against the order dated 6.3.1986 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Rajsamand in Criminal Revision Petition No. 45/1985. It appears that Criminal Revision Petition No. 45/1985; Praveen Kumar and another v. Paras Ram, was filed against the order dated 7.6.1985 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajsamand in Criminal case No. 105/1985 : Paras Ram v. Praveen Kumar and others. By the impugned order dated 7.6.1985 the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate issued process against the petitioners under Section 204 Cr.P.C. in a case instituted on a complaint filed by non-petitioner No. 2 alleging commission of offences punishable under Section 330 and 342 IPC.
(2.) THE facts of the case may be summarised as under: On 7.10.1984 non-petitioner No. 2 Paras Ram lodged a first information report at the Police Station, Rajsamand. In that report he alleged that on 5.10.1984 when he went to his field he was caught by Shyamraj, Jagdish Watchman, B.L. Gupta, Security Officer Chopra, Vijai Singh and Kedar Nath who alleged that he has committed theft of a machine. It was also alleged that he was forcibly taken to a room in the club where he was subjected to third degree treatment for the purpose of obtaining from him the information about the machine. He was illegally confined and beaten and after some time he was taken to his field where he was left unattended. When he regained his senses in the morning about 8 a.m. and thereafter he was taken to the hospital as his condition was bad. The police registered a case under Sections 147, 330, 323 and 342 IPC on the basis of the report submitted by non-petitioner No. 2. After usual investigation a report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was submitted by the police in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajsamand. In that report the police alleged that offence under Section 330 and 348 IPC were prima facie proved against Banarasi Lal, Vijai Singh, Kedar Nath and Shyamraj. Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajsamand took cognizance of the offences and commenced proceedings against the above mentioned four accused persons. In the police report submitted under Section 173 Cr.P.C. the police did not make any allegations against the petitioners Praveen Kumar Chopra and Jagdish Watchman. Non-petitioner No. 2, therefore, submitted an application before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajsamand praying that the court should proceed against Praveen Kumar and Jagdish Watchman also. The petition submitted by the non-petitioner No. 2 was treated as a complaint and cognizance of the offence mentioned therein was taken under the Section 190(1)(a) Cr.P.C. Non-petitioner No. 2 Paras Ram was examined on oath and after conducting an enquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C. the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate issued process against the petitioners Praveen Kumar and Jagdish Watchman for having committed offences punishable under Section 330 and 342 IPC. This order was passed on 7.6.1985. Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 7.6.1985 the petitioners filed a revision petition No. 45/1985.
(3.) IN the revision petition several grounds were taken for challenge the order passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate. The learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Rajsamand after taking into consideration the facts of the case as well as the relevant provisions of law dismissed the revision petition by the order dated 6.3.1986. Hence this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the order of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Rajsamand and the order dated 7.6.1985 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajsamand.;