- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the applicant and the learned AGA I have perused the impugned order.
(2.) THE applicant moved an application before the magistrate under S.156(3) Cr.P.C. on the ground that he is a mansion by profession and use to live in the house situated at village Galan along with his grandmother. His grand mother died 16-17 years back. On 30-10-2004 he locked his house and went to Hapur in connection with this job and on his return on 4-11-2004 he found that Lahari, Pappu Kamal Singh and Smt. Asha had occupied the said house and removed the household goods. The factum regarding removal of household goods was told to him by village people hence prayed for registration the case at the police station. The said prayer was rejected by order dated 25-11-2005 and the application was directed to be treated as complaint and the court fixed a date for recording of statement under S.200 Cr.P.C. Being aggrieved by the said order the present application has been filed.
(3.) A perusal of the affidavit accompanying the application shows that the ground taken by the applicant is that the stolen property was required to be recovered which could be done by the investigation only hence directing to file a complaint is not a legal order. The Magistrate passed this order relying upon Gulab Chandra Upadhyay v. State of U.P., 2002 (44) ACC page 670 : 2000 All LJ 1225 and Vijay Pandey v. State of U.P., ACC 2005 (52) 568 : 2005 All LJ 2167.;