ORDER :

1. Leave granted. We have heard the learned Counsel for the Appellant. None has appeared on behalf of the Respondents despite due service of notice.

2. The challenge in this appeal is against the order of the High Court dated 24th December, 2014 by which the process issued against the accused Respondents on the private complaint filed by the wife of the deceased Bapu Nivrutti Gund has been interfered with by the High Court.

3. We have taken note of the facts including the final report submitted by the Investigating Agency to the effect that there was insufficient evidence/material to implicate the accused Respondents. The complaint in question was filed by the wife of the deceased after submission of the aforesaid final report by the Investigating Agency. Seven witnesses were examined in the complaint proceedings and only thereafter cognizance was taken and process was issued against the accused Respondents.

4. The High Court in the impugned judgment seems to have embarked on a virtual trial of the case though it was entertaining an application Under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure/Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the order taking cognizance and t