- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the opposite party.
(2.) THE order dated 6-7-2007, whereby the petitioner's application for investigation under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was rejected, and the revisional order dated 15-12-2008, whereby the revision was dismissed, both are under challenge in this petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the pumping set of the petitioner was sto­len hence, an F.I.R. was lodged by the peti­tioner at Case Crime No.7 of 2004. He states that in the said case, the police demanded ille­gal gratification to which the petitioner declined hence the police submitted the final report. He also states that the stolen pumping set was ac­tually recovered from the house of the accused persons but was shown to have been recov­ered from the possession of none and that the accused persons arrested by the police were released after taking money from them.
(3.) THE petitioner's application under section 156(3) Cr. P.C. for demanding illegal gratification by the police, was rejected by the Magistrate concerned stating that the police has submitted the charge-sheet against the accused persons Ram Singh Misra and Pappu Misra, the named accused of the case. A revision filed against the order passed by the Magistrate, was dismissed on the ground that the Magistrate has power to reject the ap­plication under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.;