1. The petitioner before me is a practising advocate, ordinarily at Margao. He was engaged by the defendants (respondents Nos. 2 and 3) in Suit Number 203/78 brought by respondent No. 1 and others. The plaintiffs in the suit had prayed for temporary injunction. The prayer for temporary injunction was refused. Respondents Nos. 2 and 3 had filed two affidavits opposing the issue of temporary injunction. In their affidavits they said that respondent No. 1 was also commonly known as "Endo" (idiot). Respondent No. 1 took exception to his being so described and filed a complaint under Section 501 I.P.C. not only against respondents Nos. 2 and 3 but against the present petitioner on the ground that he had drafted the affidavits.

2. Before issue of summons the complainant besides examining himself examined 4 other witnesses, including his advocate. Mr. Gilman Fernandes, under Section 202 of Cr. P.C. On 8-2-1979 the J.M.F.C., Margao - respondent No. 4 - took cognizance of the case against all the accused including the petitioner under Section 500 of the I.P.C. and directed issue of summons against all. It is against this order the petitioner's advocate has moved this Court for quash