- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioners and learned AGA for the State. No one appeared on behalf of the private opposite party no.2 to oppose the petition.
(2.) THE petitioners have assailed the orders dated 15.02.2010 and 09.03.2010 passed by Judicial Magistrate -I, Sitapur in Case No.1829/2010, arising out of Crime No.657/2008, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120 -B IPC relating to Police Station Sindhauli, District Sitapur, whereby the learned Magistrate, while rejecting the final report, allowed the protest petition and summoned the petitioners to face trial. Further, by the order dated 09.03.2010, learned Magistrate has issued bailable warrant against the petitioners.
(3.) THE brief facts giving rise to this petition are that on the FIR of the opposite party no.2, a case against the petitioners was registered at Police Station Sindhauli, District Sitapur and the police after conducting investigation, submitted final report. The opposite party no.2, who is also complainant of this case, being aggrieved by the submission of the final report, filed a protest petition before the learned Magistrate concerned. The learned Magistrate, after going through the case diary and the contents of the protest petition, set aside the final report and while allowing the protest petition directed the petitioners to appear and face trial. Learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Janardan Prasad, has submitted that the impugned summoning order dated 15.02.2010 passed by the learned Magistrate, rejecting the final report and summoning the petitioners, is against the settled principles of law.;