RAM KUMAR Vs. KALAWATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S. R. Bhargava, J. This revision is directed against a summoning order in a case under Secs. 147/148/149/307/504/506 I. P. C. After First Information Report there was police investigation. Investigating Officer submitted final report. Notice was sent to com plainant who turned up and filed protest petition. She examined herself and filed affidavits of two witnesses. The learned Magistrate relied upon the statement of the complainant and the affidavits and summoned the revisionists.

(2.) CASE against the revisionists was exclusively trible by court of Sessions. After filing of protest petition the learned Magistrate had three options. He could have sent back the case to the Investigating Officer for further investigation; or he could have treated the protest petition as complaint and proceeded with the protest petition as compliant case; or after perusing the case diary he could have differed with the conclusion of the Investigating Officer and could have taken cognizance of the case under Sec. 190 (1) (c) on the basis of statement etc. found in the case Diary. But he could not have jumbled the second and the third options. When the Magistrate recorded the statement of the complainant it became clear that he treated the protest petition as complaint, when he did that he could not have relied upon affidavits. He ought to have required the complainant to file list of witnesses. He should then have examined the witnesses under the proviso of Sec. 202 (2) Cr. P. C. It is evident that the learned Magistrate to confuse the procedure adopted by him. Notice was issued to the complainant but despite to service complainant did not turn up to contest the revision.