- (1.) PETITIONER has filed this application for quashing the order dated 31.1.2007, whereby the learned court below has taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 323, 341, 379 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner, as also for quashing the order dated 16.6.2005, whereby the learned court below had recalled its earlier order passed in the same proceeding on 14.6.2005.
(2.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2. A brief facts of the case is that the opposite party no. 2 had lodged F.I.R. before the concerned police station which was subsequently registered as G.R. Case No. 765 of 2002 and on submission of final form in the shape of final report, complainant had filed a purported protest petition. The petition was taken as complaint and it was registered as complaint case no. 253 of 2004.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner explains that though, the case was taken as complaint case and the complainant was called upon to adduce his evidences in course of inquiry under Section 202 Cr. PC, but the complainant has failed to respond despite several adjournments and ultimately, by order dated 14.6.2005, proceeding was dropped by the learned court below. However, two days later i.e. by order dated 16.6.2005, the learned court below by recalling its earlier order dated 14.6.2005, had restored the complaint to its original file, which was earlier dismissed and had proceeded to take cognizance of the offences against the petitioner. Learned counsel argues that in view of the fact that the case was dismissed at one point of time the learned court below did not have authority under the law to recall its own order and restore the case to its original file and proceed to take cognizance.;