BRAHMA SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application under Section 482 CrPC for quashing the order of the Magistrate dated 26-11-1983 summoning the applicants under Sections 147 and 323 IPC.

(2.) THE two points urged by the petitioners' counsel are, firstly, that there is no compliance-.- of Section 204 (2) CrPC and that the provisions of Section 20/ CrPC would be defeated if cognizance is taken in this manner. THE cognizance has been taken on a final report submitted by the police and when that is the position procedure of the complaint case would not apply. THEre is a dir.-ct authority of Abhinaudan Jha v Dinesh Misra, AIR 1968 SC 117. It was argued that the authority is distinguishable as it related to complaint case. It is not so. In that case also the police had submitted a final report and the matter arose for consideration in that contest and the Supreme Court held that while the Magistrate cannot direct the Police itself to submit charge sheet it can nevertheless take congizance on the basis of very final report submitted by the police and proceed. This principle has been further affirmed and also developed in the case of H. S. Bains v. State, 1980 AWC 619 = 1980 ACrR 423. THEre are two pronouncements of this Court also dealing with the aspect, namely, Mohd. Sharif v. State of U. P., 1984 Part 1 Crimes 740, Allahabad High Court in which reliance upon the aforesaid two pronouncements was placed and the same view as taken, and Satyanarian v. Smt. Shanti, J984 ACrR 521 in which also the same view was taken after considering the case of Abhinanadan Jha and H. S. Bains -supra).