N.A. Britto, J.

The petitioner invokes the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code. 1973 (Code. for short) after order dated 28th February, 2003, of the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class Panda in Criminal Case No. 144/P/98/C which went against him and after he failed in Criminal Revision Application No. 37/2003 filed by him before the Court of Sessions. Panaji by Judgment/Order of the learned Sessions Judge, Panaji, dated 13th February. 2004.

2. What is in the name?

Shakespeare might have asked and answered that a Rose by any other name would smell as sweet. That is the substance of the dispute.

3. The petitioner is a A-1 and is the son of A-3 and A-4 in the said criminal case. In the cause title of the said criminal case, his name was shown as Nilesh Laxman Sawant. The learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, by virtue of order dated 2nd August, 2001, ordered the issue of process against all the accused under Sections 143, 147, 323. 324 read with 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. However, the summons sent to A-1 was returned unserved with the endorsement that A-1 was staying at Char Rasta. Canacona. Summons were issued again but this time, they were returned with endorsement that no person by name Nilesh Laxman Sawant was found.

5. Thereafter, the complainant filed an application dated 4th April, 2002, stating that the said Vaman Laxman Sawant is also known by name Nilesh Laxman Sawant. Upon the said application being made the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, directed the complainant first to amend the cause title and probably pursuant to the said direction the complainant filed another application dated 26th July, 2002 to correct the cause title and at this time, the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, curiously, observed that the allegations in the complain were against A-1, Nilesh Laxman Sawant and making further observations which are not relevant for our purpose, proceeded to dismiss the said application. It appears that the complainant filed another application which came to be dismissed again by another order dated 17th October, 2002. by observing that the complainant could not add persons as accused on the basis of endorsement on the summons.

6. The complainant then filed yet another application dated 5th December, 2002. praying to issue fresh summons to accused Nilesh Laxman Sawant with address at Kundaim. Goa and along with the said application, the complainant attached the wedding invitation card of A-1. This application was allowed but again the summons issued at the said given address were returned unserved with and endorsement that the family members of A-1 had informed that A-1 was working at Char Rasta. Canacona and as such summons were again issued at the Canacona address and were again returned unserved with endorsement that the whereabouts of A-1 at Canacona address were not known.

7. It appears that the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, issued further, orders on 23rd January, 1993, to issue fresh summons to A-1 at his residential address as given on the summons dated 27th December. 2002. and it further appears that the Bench Clerk wrongly wrote on the roznama that the summons to accused No. 1 should be issued to his address dated 27th December. 2002.

8. However. the fact remains that the petitioner as Varnan Laxman Sawant appeared before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class on 31st January, 2003 and filed an application supporting the same with an affidavit and praying therein that the summons issued to Vaman Laxman Sawant be withdrawn. It appears that the learned Judicial Magistrate. First Class entertained the said request of the petitioner Vaman Laxman Sawant and again ordered fresh summons to be issued to A-1 at the address given in the summons dated 27th December. 2002.

9. Subsequently the complainant filed an affidavit stating that the person who had appeared before the Court on 31st January, 2003, claiming to be Vaman Laxman Saw