VINOD KUMAR TIWARI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr.N.K.Pandey, learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr.Rajendra Kumar Dwivedi, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

(2.) The petitioner has challenged the order dated 23rd of March, 2011, passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Lucknow in Misc. Case No.1 of 2011, arising out of Case Crime No.249 of 2010, under Sections 498A, 306 IPC and D.P.Act, Police Station Husainganj, district Lucknow, on the ground that on the protest application the learned Magistrate has proceeded to pass an order for re-investigation without making any observations on the material available there for.

(3.) It is stated that once the final report was submitted, as no offence to have been committed by the petitioner was found, on the event of moving the application of protest the learned Magistrate was obliged to discuss the material available therein and only being satisfied with the material placed before him, he should have passed the order for re-investigation. Though he also challenged that re-investigation as not permissible, but so far as the question of re-investigation is concerned, I am of the view that it is well permissible, but with the permission of the court, as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Babubhai v. State of Gujarat and others, 2010 12 SCC 254. In support of his submission that the learned Magistrate should have passed the order for reinvestigation by forming the opinion that there is a reasonable ground, he cited a case of Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of State Through CBI v. Raj Kumar Jain, 1998 6 SCC 551. The relevant paragraph 6 of the same is reproduced hereunder:-