THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.2556 2011 JUDGMENT:- This Criminal Revision Case is filed by the petitioners against the orders in Crl.R.P.No.31 of 2010 dated 14.11.2011 on the file of the First Additional Sessions Judge, Kadapa. A private complaint was filed against the petitioners herein, who are the accused in CFR No.1621 of 2010 on the file of the I Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Kadapa and the said complaint was dismissed without following the procedure under Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1908 (for short “Cr.P.C.”) by referring the matter to the police under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. As against that order, the revision was preferred to the I Additional Sessions Judge, Kadapa and by his order dated 14.11.2011 has directed the Magistrate to follow the procedure as contemplated under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. by referring the matter under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. to the concerned police. Aggrieved by the said order, the present revision is filed by the accused persons. The point for consideration is whether the order passed by the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Kadapa is without jurisdiction and not legal? POINT: There cannot be any dispute about the fact that whenever a private complaint is filed, the Court can take up inquiry as contemplated under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. or refer the matter under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. The Court by mere allegations in the complaint without examining the witnesses and to know the truth or otherwise of the statements or the contents in the complaint, cannot dismiss the same. Therefore, evidently, the procedure adopted by the learned Magistrate is against the spirit of Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. and also Section 200 of Cr.P.C. The learned I Additional Sessions Judge has only cured the irregularity committed by the lower Court. The revision petitioners, who are the accused, at this stage, cannot complain that there is no order of acquittal in their favour or any other order to challenge the procedure directed by the I Additional Sessions Judge. Therefore, it is not a case where the provisions under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. this Court has to exercise the power to quash the proceedings, there is neither miscarriage of justice nor prejudice caused to the petitioners by the order of the lower Court. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed of at the stage of admission. ___________________________ JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO Date: 29-12-2011 INL/MR THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.2556 2011 Date: 29-12-2011 INL/MR