ANOOP KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Arun Kumar Srivastava and Sri H. V. Shastri learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A.

(2.) This petition has been filed against the order dated 4-9-2004 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Nazibabad, district Bijnor, whereby final report was accepted and the order dated 23-12-2004 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bijnor in Criminal Revision No. Nil of 2004 whereby the revision filed by the petitioner was dismissed. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has lodged the F.I.R., which was investigated by the police. After completion of the investigation final report was submitted by the I.O. Against that final report notice was issued to the petitioner by the learned Magistrate, but he did not file protest petition in the Court concerned. Thereafter, the learned Magistrate accepted the final report only on the ground that the petitioner did not appear in the Court to file protest petition against the final report. The impugned order is illegal because it was passed without considering the evidence collected by the I.O.

(3.) It is opposed by the learned A.G.A. by submitting that the petitioner has accepted notice sent by the learned Magistrate even then he did not appear in the Court to file the protest petition against the final report. It shows that he was not having any objection against the final report. Therefore, the learned Magistrate passed perfect order.