SURENDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of instant petition under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C., petitioners have challenged the order dtd. 29/4/2003 passed by the learned Additional Judicial Magistrate No. 3, Bikaner whereby he was refused to accept the Final Report and has taken cognizance against them for the offence under Sec. 147, 148, 341, 323, 382 r/w 149 IPC and Sec. 3 of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

(2.) It is contended by the learned counsel that the learned Judge while. taking cognizance has not dealt with the reasons given by the police for forwarding the Final Report.

(3.) Reliance has been placed on a decision of this Court in 1993 Cr.LR(Raj) p. 591. I find substance in the contention raised by the learned counsel. From the perusal of the order under consideration, it is apparent that while the learned Magistrate has referred to the statements of some of the witnesses recorded during investigation but he has not applied his mind .o the question why the Final Report submitted by the investigating agency is lot acceptable. In absence of such consideration in my opinion, the order cannot be sustained and has to be quashed.