THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No. 6392 of 2009 ORDER: The revision petitioners are said to be accused in a private complaint filed by the defacto-complainant/2nd respondent in C.F.No.2405 of 2006 on the file of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada. A private complaint was filed for several offences and matter was referred for investigation and it was registered as a case in Crime No.268 of 2005 and after investigation, the police referred the case as non-cognizable. Thereafter, the learned Magistrate dismissed the protest petition and directed the police to file the charge sheet. Aggrieved by that a revision was preferred by the defacto-complainant and the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Vijayawada, has allowed the revision directing the Magistrate to conduct enquiry as contemplated under Section 203 Cr.P.C. When the protection petition is filed and it is ordered directing the police to file a charge sheet is not warranted without recording the evidence and with the above direction, the matter was remanded to the lower court. It appears subsequently the summons were said to have been issued to the 2nd petitioner for appearance in the above C.F. The present petition is filed to quash the proceedings in C.F.No.2405 of 2006. 2. Evidently, till now the learned Magistrate has not taken the cognizance of the offence and unless and until the cognizance is taken the validity of maintainability cannot be considered by this Court. Merely because the earlier complaint was filed on the similar contentions, it does not mean that the present complaint is also a false one. Therefore, it is for the learned Magistrate to decide as to whether the case can be taken on file or not. But as rightly contended by the petitioner, issue of the summons without taking cognizance is not warranted. Therefore, in view of the above circumstances, the Criminal Petition is partly allowed and summons said to have been issued to the Revision Petitioner even before taking of cognizance is quashed and however, the Magistrate is directed to proceed as per the orders of the Sessions Judge passed in Criminal Revision No.5 of 2008. If at all the case is taken on file, then the court can issue summons and the petitioners will have every right to challenge the same. 3. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. _____________________________ N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO, J Date:15.12.2011. Gk THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No. 6392 of 2009 DATE: 15.12.2011 Gk