- (1.) The petitioner, Ramesh Kumar Dalmiya, is aggrieved by the order dated 13.08.2012 passed by the Additional Civil Judge [Junior Division] & Metropolitan Magistrate, No.11, Jaipur Metropolitan, whereby the learned Magistrate has returned the negative Final Report to the Police, and has directed the Police to carry out further investigation.
(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the respondent No.2, Nitin Sarraf, filed a criminal complaint against the petitioner before the learned Magistrate. The Magistrate sent the said complaint for investigation under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. to the Police Station, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur City [South]. On receipt of the said complaint, the Police registered a formal F.I.R., namely F.I.R. No.598/2010, for offences under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 120-B and 386 I.P.C. as well as for offences under Sections 65 and 66 of the I.T. Act. However, after a thorough investigation, on 27.10.2010, the Police submitted a negative Final Report claiming that the case was basically of a civil nature, and since the parties have entered into a compromise, no criminal case was made out against the petitioner. Since the complainant-respondent was aggrieved by the negative Final Report, he filed a protest petition before the learned Magistrate. On 24.02.2011, the Magistrate recorded the statement of the complainant under Section 200 Cr.P.C. By order dated 13.08.2012 the Magistrate returned the negative Final Report to the Police, and directed the Police to further investigate the case. Since the petitioner is aggrieved by the said order, he has submitted the present petition before this Court.
(3.) Mr. Gurvinder Singh, the learned counsel for the petitioner, has raised the following contentions before this Court : firstly, it is unclear whether the impugned order has been passed under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. or under Section 202 (2) Cr.P.C. However, as "further investigation" has been ordered, the impugned order seems to have been passed under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C.;