S.C.CHAURASIA,J. - (1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A., the learned Counsel for the op­posite party No. 2, Sri Ved Prakash Shukla, Advocate and perused the record.
(2.) THIS petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C., has been filed with the prayer that the complaint case No. 267 of 2002, Raghav Ram v. Hanoman and Ors., pend­ing in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gonda, alongwith the order of taking cognizance dated 16-6-2004, summoning the petitioners under Sections 419 and 420, I.P.C., may be quashed. The counter-affidavit and rejoinder-affidavit have been exchanged between the parties.
(3.) THE learned Counsel for the peti­tioners has submitted that the F.I.R. was registered in compliance with Court's or­der passed on an application moved un­der Section 156(3), Cr.P.C., and after reg­istration of the case, the investigation was conducted; that after completion of the investigation, the final report was filed; that in response to the notice issued by the Court, the complainant appeared in the Court; that the learned Magistrate was re­quired to pass an appropriate order on the final report before taking cognizance and recording the statement of the complain­ant; that the learned Magistrate, has com­mitted illegality in recording the statement of the complainant without passing an ap­propriate order on the final report.;