JUDGMENT

Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) - Since in both the above captioned petitions, parties are same and question of law involved is also similar, as such, same are being taken up together for disposal vide this common judgment.

2. Present petitions are directed against orders dated 27.9.2012 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shimla in case No. 105-2 of 211 (CrMMO No. 93 of 2014) and case No. 104- 2 of 11 (CrMMO No. 94 of 2014) both titled as Dr. Shrikant Baldi v. Ms. Jeevan Laxmi Kukreja, whereby learned Court below taking cognizance of the complaints under Sections 500 and 211 IPC having been filed by the respondent issued process against the petitioner directing her to remain present in the court on 5.5.2014.

3. For having a bird''s eye view, necessary facts as emerge from the record are that the petitioner filed two complaints under section 10(2) of the Equal Remuneration Act, 1976 and Section 21 of the Maternity Benefits Act alleging therein that she was not paid due and admissible wages/maternity benefits, while she worked with the Himachal Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter, ''HRTC'') with effect from 1.6.1991 to 8.10.2001. Allegedly, complainant was posted as a Com