BADRILAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 4.1.2019 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Begu, District Chittorgarh whereby the learned Magistrate accepted the protest petition filed by the respondent No. 2 and took cognizance against the petitioner for offence under Section 376-B I.P.C.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner submits that after completion of the investigation, the police submitted final report in the matter before the Trial Court but the Trial Court without appreciating the facts mentioned in the final report, took cognizance against the petitioner for offence under Section 376-B I.P.C. It is further submitted that there are material contradictions in the statements of the respondent No. 2 recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., hence it is crystal clear that the respondent No. 2 with an intention to harass the petitioner, had lodged a false criminal case. However, the learned Trial Court while relying upon the statement of the respondent No. 2 took the cognizance against the petitioner.

(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor contended that the learned Magistrate has committed no error in passing the order impugned by rejecting the final report submitted by the Investigating Officer and thus requires no interference from this Court.