A.S.GODARA, J. - (1.) WITH the consent of learned Counsel for the parties present before this Court, this petition is being finally disposed of.
(2.) CASE of the petitioners is that non -petitioner No. 2 Smt. Taramani filed a criminal complaint before the trial court for alleged commission of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and the learned Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Ganganagar subsequent thereto, without first applying his judicial mind to allegations under the complaint, proceeded to take to congnizance of the alleged offence and further, without complying with the mandatory provisions of Sections 200 and 202, CrPC, vide impugned order dated 3.3.1990, straight away took cognizance of the aforesaid offence and issued summons to the accused petitioner for appearance on 24.4.1990 and dates subsequent thereto. The petitioner appeared before the trial court on 13.7.1990 when he was ordered to be released on bail. He filed an application before the trial court challenging, the impugned order dated 3.3.1990 on the ground that there was no compliance of the mandatory provisions of Sections 200 and 202, CrPC and, therefore, the impugned order taking cognizance of the alleged offence was as such, vitiated and was liable to be set aside and all proceedings are consequent thereto deserved to be dropped. However, consequent upon filing of this application, learned trial Magistrate proceeded to examine the complainant non - petitioner No. 2 Smt. Taramani on 21.9.1990 and on the same day, it was further ordered that case be posted for hearing arguments for taking cognizance of the offence, if any, on 24.10.1990. No substantial progress could be made on 24.10.1990 in the first instance. However, in an additional order -sheet of the same date it was ordered that since the complainant Smt. Taramani has already been examined as above, let the application filed by the accused -petitioner be posted for hearing and order on 17.12.1990.
(3.) MEANWHILE , as submitted by learned Counsel for the petitioner, before any final order disposing of the application moved by the accused petitioner be passed, this revision petition was preferred and a stay order was passed on 13.7.1990 and thereafter no further proceedings could be taken by the trial court.;