RAKESH & Anr. v. STATE OF U.P & Anr.

Respondent No.2 lodged an FIR for offence punishable u/s 364 IPC against the appellants and two others. On completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted a final report to the court that no case was made out against the persons accused and that they F wc~re falsely implicated in the case. By order dated 26.11.2002, the Magistrate accepted the final report but simultaneously directed that the case be proceeded with as a complaint case. The statements u/ss 200 and 202 Cr.P.C.,were recorded and the accused were summoned G by the trial court to face the trial. The appellants moved the High Court, which answered in affirmative the question as to whether a Magistrate after accepting a ' negative final report submitted by the Police can take action on the. basis of the protest petition filed by the H complainant/first informant. 1072 RAKESH &ANR v. STATE OF U.P. &ANR. 1073 In the instant appeal, it was contended for the A accused-appellant that having accepted the final report, the Magistrate had become "functus officio" and was denuded of all powers to proceed in the matter. Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1.1 In Gopal Vijay Verma*, this Court held that the High Court was clearly in error in thinking that the Magistrate could not take cognizance of a case upon complaint because he had earlier refused to take cognizance of the case on a police report. [Para 6) c [1076-C-D]