V.P.Mathur - (1.) CRIMINAL Revistion No. 1720 of 1982 is directed against an order passed on 16-8-1982 by Shri G. N. Sinha, the then VI Munsif Magistrate Varanasi in CRIMINAL Case no. nil of 1982 under sections 147 and 436 IPC State v. Param Hansh Singh and others pertaining to police station Syed Raja, Varanasi, whereby he has rejected the final report and taken cognizance of the case and directed issue of summonses for the accused persons for their appearance on a date, which he has fixed.
(2.) SIMILARLY Criminal Revision no. 1721 of 1982 is directed against the judgment and order passed on the same date by the same Magistrate in another criminal case under sections 342, 147, 325 and 323 IPC pertaining to the same police station in which also he has rejected the final report submitted before him by the police and summoned the accused for 7-10-1982 for appearance. It may be mentioned here that in both the cases simultaneous to the submission of the final report by the police, a protest petition was also moved and this order was passed on the back of the final report itself. The only point that arose for decision was whether the order of summoning was passed on the consideration of the police papers or on the protest petition. It is true that under section 169 of the Code of Criminal Procedure when a final report is submitted, the police is not bound to submit with the report all the police papers on the basis of which investigation has resulted, in the opinion of the police that no case is made out, but if even in such a case police papers are submitted and while considering the protest petition the learned Magistrate looks into those papers including the Case Diary, Injury-reports, post-mortem examination report, if any, and other similar documents and decides to take cognizance of the case and summon the accused, then it will again be an order of summoning under section 190 (1) (b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and in such a case summoning out-right or straightway will be in order. There will be no need to proceed treating it to be a case on complaint because it is not the protest petition, which is the basis for the order passed in the circumstances. It is the police report itself. It need not be stated, as the matter has now become judicially concluded and does not call for any reinstatement; that the hands of the learned Magistrate are not tied with the report of the police and he can always disagree with the report of the police and can come to a different conclusion on the same papers on which the police submitted the final report. Under these circumstances the cognizance has been taken under section 190 (1) (b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the order of summoning is justified.
(3.) THERE is no force in these two revisions, which are both dismissed accordingly. The lower court's record is before me and it shall now be sent back to the Court below forthwith so that further proceedings are expedited. Revisions dismissed.;