A second complaint is maintainable even if the first complaint was dismissed under Section 203 Cr. P. C., provided that it is not barred by any of the exceptions given in AIR 1962 SC 876.

( 1 ) THIS is an application for leave to appeal in a case of acquittal under Sections 468, 469 and 471 IPC. Applicant Ram Surat Duvedi is a Lecturer in an Educational Institution and accused Ram Kumar Trivedi is the Principal of the institution. The first complaint was filed by Ram Surat Duvedi in 1978 alleging that the Principal, Ram Kumar Trivedi, has fabricated a resignation letter purporting to be signed by Ram Surat Duvedi. It was alleged by the complainant that the resignation letter is a forged one and therefore the Principal should be punished for forgery.

( 2 ) THE first complaint was dismissed under Section 203 Cr. P. C. on 16-1-1979 with the observation that the complaints counsel pleaded no instructions and the complainant himself is absent. As there was no evidence under Section 202 Cr. P. C. the Court dismissed the complaint under Section 203 Cr. P. C. on 9-4-1979 the complainant filed the second complaint and his statement was recorded under S. 200 Cr. P. C. After examining two witnesses under S. 202 Cr. P. C. the case was registered and the accused was summoned. The complainant examined all his witnesses who were duly cross-examined by the accused. The statement of the accused was recorded and he also led evidence in defence. On 18-8-1981 when two defence witnesses had already been examined, the accused filed an application in which he raised the objection for the first time that the first complaint having been dismissed under Section 203 Cr. P. C the second complaint is barred because it is not covered by any of the exceptions given in AIR 1962 SC 876. 0n 7-9-1981 the Court ordered that the application dated 18-8-1981 will be considered at the time of final arguments because by that time the defence evidence was also over. The accused took time to file a revision. After taking some adjournments the accused filed an application under Section 482. Cr. P. C. before this Court which was application No. 5495 of 1981 Ram Kumar Trivedi v. Ram Surat. In this application filed under Section 482 Cr. P. C. the accused obtained a stay order from this Court and the further progress of the complaint filed by Ram Surat Duvedi was held up.

( 3 ) THE application filed by the accused under Section 482 Cr. P. C. was decided by this Court on 15-11-1985 and the Court passed the following order :"learned counsel for both the parties have admitted before me that in pursuance of the second complaint in criminal case No. 1051 of 1980, the parties have led their evidence and the case, before filing of this application, was fixed for arguments. If that be so, in my opinion it is not a fit case for quashing the proceedings in exercise of power under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The question as to whether on the facts and circumstances of the case an offence has been made out against the applicant will be the question which will be gone into by the Court below and in that connection the Court below will definitely examine the question as to whether in the true sense the dispute between the parties is of purely civil nature or not. The learned counsel for the applicant has also urged that the applicant would like to take ground regarding the maintainability of the complaint. The Court below will decide all the points which are raised by the parties after hearing them. "

( 4 ) WITH the decision of the application under Section 482 Cr. P. C. the stay order was also vacated. When the matter was again taken up by the lower Court the accused filed another application on 2-12-1986 in which he reiterated the same objection that the second complaint is not maintainable. The learned Magistrate upheld this objection by the impugned order dated 3-3-1987 and passed an order on acquittal holding that the second complaint is not maintainable. Under these circumstances the present application for leave to appeal has been filed by the complainant.

( 5 ) I have heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the ac