AMARJEET SINGH AND ANR. Vs. STATE AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Learned counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that while taking cognizance on 12.06.2009 upon protest petition filed by respondent No. 2, the Magistrate took cognizance for commission of offences under Secs. 323, 341 and 382, I.P.C. and issued warrant of arrest. The said order was challenged by way of revision petition. The revisional Court however upheld the order passed by the Magistrate for taking cognizance.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that once, after thorough investigation PR was filed by the investigating officer, then, at the time of taking cognizance upon protest petition, the Court was not required to issue warrant of arrest. Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that at the time of taking cognizance upon protest petition the magistrate was under obligation to consider and discuss the finding given by the investigating officer in the FR.