M.L.Visa, J.

1. The petitioner in this application has prayed for quashing the order dated 11.4.1996 passed by Shri Abhay Kumar, Judicial Magistrate, Auran-gabad, in Complaint Case No. 85/96 whereby and whereunder the learned Magistrate has directed to issue summons against the petitioner for his appearance in the case for facing trial.

2. The facts giving rise to this matter, in brief, are that opposite party no. 2 Binod Bihari Prasad, filed a complaint (annexure-1) against the petitioner in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Auran-gabad, stating therein that his daughter Sakuntala Devi was married to petitioner in the year 1984 according to Hindu rites and thereafter she and petitioner were living as husband and wife and four children were born out of this wedlock. In the year 1992 the petitioner after torturing his wife, mentally and physically, took her with children to opposite party no. 2 and left there and stopped maintaining them. The daughter of opposite party no. 2 filed a petition in court claiming maintenance for herself and for her children and her prayer was allowed. The petitioner thereafter filed a divorce suit against the daughter of opposite party no. 2 before the District Judge, Aurangabad, which was transferred to the court of 2nd Additional District Judge, Aurangabad. In para-7 of divorce petition the petitioner levelled allegations against opposite party no. 2 by stating "that the respondent father and the father-in-law of the petitioner is very shrewed and greedy man and he is earning money from selling the body of her daughter (respondent)". The copy of the petition was served on the daughter of opposite party no. 2 by court and daughter of opposite party no. 2 read the copy of the petition and from her, opposite party no. 2 also came to know about the statement made against him. He obtained certified copy of the petition filed by petitioner in divorce suit. Opposite party no. 2 then filed a complaint under section 500 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code (in short, IPC) before the court of CJM alleging therein that the petitioner knowingly with an intent to harm the reputation of opposite party no. 2 made false statements against him in the petition of divorce case and by the action ot petitioner the prestige of opposite party no. 2 who is a retired teacher and is a respectable man has been lowered down, The CJM, Aurangabad, after receipt of the complaint made over the same to Shri Abhay Kumar, Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad, under section 192 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, Cr. P.C.) who after making the inquiry under section 202 Cr. P.C., by the impugned order issued summons for the appearance of 1 the petitioner for facing trial. The petitioner has now, as stated above, in this application challenged this order. This matter was first listed before a single Judge of this Court where rival contentions were raised by parties on the point of publication of the statements made by petitioner in divorce case against opposite party no. 2. The learned single Judge observing that since question of law is involved in this case referred it to a Division Bench. This is how the matter is now before us.

3. That petitioner has filed a suit for divorce against his wife who is the daughter of opposite party no. 2, which is numbered as Matrimonial Case No. 85/96 and is pending in the court of District Judge, Aurangabad is an admitted fact. The fact that petitioner in para-7 of the petition of Matrimonial Case No. 85/96 filed by him against his wife who is the daughter of opposite party no. 2 has stated that opposite party no. 2 is very shrewed and greedy man and he is earning money from selling the body of her daughter (respondent) is also not in dispute.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that as the statement by petitioner in respect of opposite party no. 2 has been made in a petition of a matrimonial case it cannot be said that there is publication of such