RAM KARAN Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Prashant Kumar Singh, Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A.

(2.) It is contended that the petitioner lodged an F.I.R. which was investigated by the Investigating officer. Thereafter the final report was submitted in favour of the accused persons. The notice was sent to the petitioner but he did not file any protest petition in the court of learned Magistrate. Learned Metropolitan Magistrate VI, Kanpur Nagar accepted the final report on 20.8.2004 only on the ground that the first informant had not filed the protest petition against the final report. That order was challenged by way of filing criminal Revision No. Nil of 2004, the same was dismissed by learned Incharge Sessions Judge, Kanpur Nagar on 25.10.2004.

(3.) It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the order passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate VI, Kanpur Nagar, accepting final report only the ground of non-filing of the protest petition is illegal. It is opposed by the learned A.G.A. by submitting that there is no illegality in the impugned orders because both the orders have been passed by courts below after considering all the facts.