Ravindra Singh - (1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.
(2.) IN the present case complaint was filed by the I.O., the same has been dismissed by the learned A.C.J.M., Court No. 2, Allahabad on 22.9.2006. Thereafter a revision was filed by the applicants which too has been dismissed. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the order dated 22.9.2006 passed by the learned Magistrate is illegal, it does not have any reason. In reply to the above it is submitted by the learned A.G.A. that there is no illegality in the impugned order because the learned Magistrate has considered the complaint and the statements recorded under Sections 200 and 202, Cr. P.C. The impugned order dated 22.9.2006 is not suffering from any illegality or irregularity.
(3.) CONSIDERING the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. and from the perusal of the impugned order dated 22.9.2006 passed by the learned A.C.J.M., Court No. 2, Allahabad and the order dated 17.5.2007 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge/F.T.C. Court No. 23, Allahabad, it appears that in the present case the applicant has filed the complaint and statements thereafter under Sections 200 and 202, Cr. P.C. have been recorded. From the perusal of the complaint aforementioned case and the statements recorded under Sections 200 and 202, Cr. P.C., a prima facie offence against the applicant is made out. The learned Magistrate has rejected the complaint on 22.9.2006. The order dated 22.9.2006 is not a reasoned order and the learned Magistrate has tried to appreciate the evidence at the stage of taking cognizance for which the learned Magistrate was not legally permitted because the appreciation of the evidence is done at the stage of conclusion of the trial for the purpose of acquittal or conviction. At this stage, it is to be seen whether on the basis of allegation made against the accused, prima facie offence is made out or not. The learned Magistrate has committed manifest error of law and illegality in rejecting the complaint. The revisional court has also not considered manifest error committed by the learned Magistrate concerned and illegally dismissed the revision on 17.5.2007. The impugned orders are illegal and are hereby set aside.;