- (1.)PETITIONERS of the above captioned two petitions are the complainants of two criminal complaints i.e. one under Sections 418/420/467/468/471/506/120-B of IPC and the other one under Sections 327/347/380/386/120-B of IPC in which petitioners had sought direction under Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C. for registration of two separate FIRs on the basis of above two complaints.
(2.)IN the above-captioned first petition, trial court vide order of 16th December, 2008 had directed respondent-State to register the FIR on the basis of aforesaid criminal complaint of petitioners which was challenged by respondent-State as well as by respondent-accused by way of two separate revision petitions i.e. Criminal Revision Petitions No.145/2008 & 174/2009 and vide common impugned order of 11th May, 2009, the revision petition preferred by respondent-accused (as per amended memo of parties) was held to be maintainable and both the revision petitions were accepted while setting aside trial court's order of 16th December, 2008 and petitioners' criminal complaint was directed to be proceeded with in accordance with the law.
In the above captioned second petition, trial court vide order of 19th February, 2009 had accepted petitioners' application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. for registration of FIR under Sections 327/347/380/386/120- B of IPC against respondents No.2 to 7 (as per amended memo of parties) who were accused No.1 to 6 before trial court and accused No.7 & 8 i.e. respondents No.8 & 9 herein were left out. Petitioners had preferred criminal revision No.175/2009 seeking registration of FIR against respondents No.8 & 9 (accused No.7 & 8) as well and respondent-accused had also preferred criminal revision No.165/2009 against trial court's order directing registration of FIR against them. Revisional court vide impugned order of 11th May, 2009 has held revision petition of respondent-accused to be maintainable and trial court's order of 19th February, 2009 has been set aside with direction to proceed with petitioners' complaint in accordance with the law and to determine as to whether cognizance under Section 190 of Cr.P.C. has to be taken against accused or not.

(3.)WITH the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the above- captioned two petitions were taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this common judgment as the submissions advanced in the above-captioned two petitions were identical.