The main legal point established in the judgment is the vital importance of the examination of the complainant under Section 200 of the CrPC and the role of recording the statement of the complainant on oath in ascertaining the prima facie case against the accused.

1. Heard learned Advocates for the respective parties.

2. Rule.

3. By consent, Rule is made returnable forthwith and the petition is taken up for final disposal.

4. This matter was heard at length on 15.6.2016 and 16.6.2016. On 16.6.2016, this Court has passed the following order:-

“1. The order of issuance of process of the learned Magistrate is on the basis of taking cognizance of a complaint u/s 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. by invoking its powers u/s 190(1)(a). By the impugned judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Dhule dated 01/08/2015, the order of the learned Magistrate dated 21/08/2014 has been quashed and set aside primarily on the ground that Section 200 of the Cr.P.C. was not complied with as there was no recording of verification of the complainant.

2. In this backdrop, it is necessary to peruse the record.

3. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that he would apply for a certified copy of the verification of the petitioner as has been recorded by the learned Magistrate in Reg. Cri. Case 794/2006.

4. In the light of the statement made, the petitioner is permitted to apply for a certified copy of the verification and produce the same in this Court prior to the next date of hearing in this matter.

5. Stand over to 28/06/2016.”

5. This matter was, thereafter, heard today.

6. I have considered the submissions of Shri Nagargoje, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Shri Hon, the learned Sr. Advocate for respondents 2 to 18 along with the learned APP for the State.

7. The relevant factors as are evident from the record and therefore, undisputed, are as under:-

(a) Regular Criminal Case No.794 of 2006, at the instance of the petitioner under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code (“CrPC”) was lodged on 4.11.2006.

(b) The learned Magistrate directed police investigation on 5.12.2006.

(c) The concerned police submitted the “B” Summary Report on 2.4.2007.

(d) The learned Magistrate by invoking his powers under Section 200 of the CrPC directed the recording of the statement of the complainant on 24.8.2007.

(e) The complainant led evidence on the point of issuance of process on 7.3.2009.

(f) The order for issuance of process against the accused under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 469, 471 read with 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (“IPC”) was passed on 22.9.2009.

(g) These proceedings have travelled upto this Court on two occasions.

(h) The judgment and order dated 16.7.2014, delivered by this Court in Criminal Writ Petition No.148 of 2013 led to a direction to the learned Magistrate to consider the material on record afresh.

(i) By order dated 21.8.2014, the learned Magistrate passed a detailed and reasoned order thereby issuing process against the accused.

(j) The accused preferred Criminal Revision Application No.89 of 2014 for challenging the order of issuance of process.

(k) The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dhule by an interim order dated 20.6.2015, concluded that Section 200 was complied with and rejected the application for stay after considering the record and proceedings and then returned the R & P to the learned Magistrate for proceeding with RCC No.794 of 2006.

(l) By the impugned judgment, the same learned Additional Sessions Judge allowed the Revision filed by the accused specifically on the ground that the learned Magistrate has failed to comply with Section 200 of the CrPC and, therefore, directed the said Court to follow the procedure and pass an order on the aspect of issuance of process.

8. Having considered the strenuous submissions of the learned Advocates and having gone through the record available, it is apparent from the dates and sequence of events that the complainant was examined on 7.3.2009 under Section 200 after the “B” Summary report was filed. It was thereafter that the first order of issuance of process was issued on 22.9.2009 and pursuant to the directions of this Court dated 16.7.2014, the learned Magistrate considered the entire material before him and passed a reasoned order dated 21.8.2