Law:

Section:

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)-------S. 200---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.324/337-A(i)/ 337-F(iii)/34----Private complaint---Summoning of accused---Complainant brought private complaint against accused before Judicial Magistrate--­Complainant led preliminary evidence and Judicial Magistrate who was seized of the matter, after inquiry found that offence against accused had been made out and submitted case to Additional Sessions Judge alongwith his inquiry report---Additional Sessions .nudge observing that accused prima facie were connected with alleged offence on basis of preliminary evidence brought on record, ordered their summoning to face trial--Accused had alleged that complaint against them, in fact was a counterblast and that Medico-legal Reports produced by complainant in support of her plea in private complaint were bogus and on basis of the same petitioners could not be summoned by Court---Complainant, besides herself had produced three witnesses in support of her allegations against petitioners and Additional Sessions Judge after perusing report submitted by Judicial Magistrate, had observed that prima facie sufficient material was available on record to connect petitioners with offence allegedly committed by them---Plea of petitioners that complaint against them was counter-blast and that Medico-legal Reports were bogus required to be proved in due course of trial---Petitioners, ought to have agitated such questions before the Court concerned in a proper way--­Petitioners, in circumstances, were rightly summoned---No case for interference with order of Sessions Judge having been made out, revision petition filed by petitioners, was dismissed. ORDER Petitioner Mazhar Abbas through the instant revision petition has sought for setting aside the order, dated 20-2-2004 recorded by Mr. Shakeel Ahmad, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chiniot whereby he has summoned the petitioner and others m the private complaint brought by respondent No.2 against them under sections 337-A(i)/337-F(iii)/324, read with section 34, P.P.C. 2. Briefly the facts relevant for the disposal of the instant revision petition are that respondent No.2 Mst. Moondan had…