Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 239 (BOM)

Hukumchand S/o Rupchand Baretiye v. State of Maharashtra

2017-02-03

T.V.NALAWADE

body2017
JUDGMENT : 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent, heard both the sides for final disposal. 2. Present proceeding is filed to challenge the order of issue process made by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Aurangabad in SCC No. 5099/2015. Order of issue process is made for the offences punishable under sections 323, 504 r/w. 34 of Indian Penal Code. 3. This Court has carefully gone through the allegations made in the private complaint. Four incidents of different dates are mentioned in the complaint and they are dated 27.4.2014, 30.4.2014, 23.5.2014 and 30.5.2014. Allegations are made that on those dates all accused gave abuses to the complainant and gave threat also. The provision of section 219 of Criminal Procedure Code shows that only three offences of similar kind can be clubbed in one prosecution. Thus, an attempt is made to club four offences in one complaint. This circumstance is not at all considered by the learned J.M.F.C. 4. The complaint shows that one accused is resident of Jalna when the complaint is filed in the Court of J.M.F.C., Aurangabad. The provision of section 202 of Cr.P.C. as amended in the year 2006 shows that when the accused are from different jurisdiction, the Magistrate is expected to postpone issuing process and make inquiry under section 202 of Cr.P.C. This aspect was not touched by the J.M.F.C. 5. The aforesaid circumstances show that in mechanical manner order of issue process was made by the learned J.M.F.C. Vague allegations are made against all the accused and role played by each accused is not mentioned. Even particulars of abuses are not mentioned in the complaint. In view of these circumstances, this Court holds that the order of issue process cannot sustain in law and allowing such proceeding will be misuse of process of law. 6. In the result, application is allowed. Order of issue process is set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Court of Magistrate. The Magistrate is required to follow the procedure and then make further orders. Rule is made absolute in aforesaid terms.