JUDGMENT :

MITALI THAKURIA, J.

1. Heard Mr. A. Lal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State respondent and Mr. S. Banik, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2.

2. This petition is filed under Section 482 read with Sections 397, 399, 401 of the code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, praying for quashing of the C.R. case No. 104/17, which is pending before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Morigaon, Assam as well as order dated 15.12.2017, passed in the aforesaid C.R. Case No. 104/17.

3. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present petition is that:

3.1. The respondent No. 2 and the petitioner are husband and wife, and their marriage was solemnized on 12.12.2014, as per Hindu rites and rituals. On 13.09.2015, a girl child was born out of the wedlock and at present the daughter is residing with the petitioner.

3.2. The respondent No. 2 filed a criminal complaint against the petitioner for alleged commission of offence under Sections 466/468/469 of the IPC, before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Morigaon, Assam and the same was registered as C.R. Case No. 104/2007. It was alleged, in the said case, that the birth certificate of the daughter of the complainant was forged. In connection with the same offence a criminal complaint being C.R. No. 880/16 was filed, where, the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Morigaon after examining the complaint, was pleased to direct the Officer-in-charge, Morigaon Police Station to register a police case and investigate the matter accordingly.

3.3. Based on the averments made in C.R. case No. 104/2017, the learned Trial Magistrate directed the Officer-in-charge, Morigaon, police station to submit a report as to whether any police case in pursuance to C.R. Case No. 880/16 was registered. Accordingly, the Officer-in-charge informed on 14.07.2017 that the above noted C.R. Case No. 880/16 had not received at the police station and as such, no case was registered.

3.4. After receipt of the said report from the police station, the learned Trial Magistrate proceeded with the case of C.R. No. 104/17, and fixed the next date for initial deposition. On 29.07.2017, the complainant was examined under Section 200 Cr.P.C. by the learned Trial Magistrate and directed the respondent to bring the witnesses.

3.5. On 10.11.16, the respondent brought the witness, who was accordingly examined under Section 202 of the Cr.P.C. Again, on 15.12.17, the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Morigaon was pleased to take cognizance of offence under Section 466 IPC and also issued notice upon the present petitioner.

3.6. The petitioner had received only the complaint petition without any annexure or documents along with the summons. As such, the petitioner applied for the certified copy of the “Xerox copy” of the birth certificate filed before the learned Trial Court. But, the “Xerox” copy of the birth certificate was not provided to the petitioner, on the ground that it was “Xerox” and as such the petitioner was unable to annex the same before this Court.

3.7. The Joint Director of Health Service, Morigaon, Assam, vide letter dated 03.08.17 submitted a reply against the RTI application made by Shri Mintu Sarma, who is the brother of the respondent No. 2. A bare perusal of the said letter demonstrate that the birth Certificate No. 645 was issued based on the information provided by Ms. Junu Das, who is an ASHA worker.

3.8. That mere perusal of the complaint petition demonstrates that based on same facts and between the same parties, another criminal petition bearing C.R. Case No. 880/16 was pending before the learned Trial Court.

3.9. In paragraph 6 and 7 of the complaint petition mentioned that the petitioner with the help of Shri Tulen Ch. Deka manipulated the birth certificate by giving false information and address of the respondent. The respondent further alleged that in the birth certificate