Is it of any help:
7. In AIR 1976 (Vol. 2) SC 1947, Smt. Nagaivwa v. Veeranna
Shilalingeppa Konjalgi and Ors., it has been made clear by the Hon'ble
Apex Court that while issuing process, the Magistrate is mainly
concerned with the allegations made in the complaint or the evidence
led in support of the same and he is only to be satisfied whether there
are sufficient grounds for proceeding against the accused. It is not
the province of the Magistrate to enter into a detailed discussion of
the merits or demerits of the case nor can the High Court go into this
matter in its revisional jurisdiction which is a very limited one.
8. In another case, Hon'ble Apex Court has held in 1992 (Vol. 2) Cr.
L.J. 1956, Sri Chand Dhazvan v. Jawahar Lal and Ors., that if the
Magistrate is prima facie, satisfied and has issued summons, quashing
of the order is not justified on the ground of false evidence. If the
Magistrate was satisfied that an offence had been disclosed and
accordingly the summons had been issued, the High Court was justified
in reaching the conclusion that the proceedings were not liable to be
quashed on the basis of additional merits produced by the accused as
those were not required to be proved.
