YASIN Vs. SAJJAD HUSAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision has been preferred against the order dated 9-9-1992 passed by the A.C.J.M. III Court, Muzaffar Nagar summoning the revisionst under Section 364, I.P.C.

(2.) The point that has been canvased by the learned counsel is that when the learned Magistrate did not accept the final report whereupon a protest petition was filed by the complainant along with the affidavits of the witnesses the second complaint filed by the said complainant is barred under rules of estoppel. A criminal case was instituted by one Sajjad Hussain against the revisionist which ended in final report. A protest petition was lodged by the said complainant and after considering the merits of the case learned Magistrate by an order dated 23-10-1991 rejected the protest petition and accepted the final report. It has been stated that no revision was filed against the said order. Thereafter the said Sajjad Husain filed one petition of complaint who was examined under Section 200, Cr. P.C. and also examined six witnesses on his behalf. Learned Magistrate after considering all the circumstances referred before him summoned the accused-revisionist under Section 365, I.P.C. on 9-9-1992. He has also considered the order dated 23-10-1991 and was of the opinion that acceptance of final report is no bar in taking cognizance against the accused-revisionist on a second complaint filed by the said complainant.

(3.) Learned counsel for the respondent No. 1, the complainant, has submitted that acceptance of final report bears no effect in taking cognizance thereafter. He has also submitted that protest petition filed by the said complainant should not be treated as a petition of complaint as the same was filed with certain allegations against the investigating agency. He has referred a decision reported in 1967 Cri LJ 111 : (AIR 1967 Patna 473) (State of Bihar v. Sakal Deep Singh) wherein it has been held that protest petition should not be treated as petition of complaint as envisaged under Section 200, Cr. P.C. and if cognizance is taken by rejecting the final report the cognizance would be under Section 190 (1)(b), Cr. P.C. and the procedure of trial to be followed should be along with the procedure for disposal of the cases on police report.