The duty of the competent court to scrutinize the final report and take a decision to accept or reject it, as well as the need to consider the final report and police investigation before taking cognizance based on a complaint.

S.P. Pathak, J.-This revision petition filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 CrPC, has been directed against the order dated 07.08.2003 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Jr. Division, 1st Class, Bikaner in Case No.604/2002 taking cognizance against the petitioners under Section 498A and 406 IPC.

2. The brief facts of the case giving rise to this petition are that complainant respondent No.2 filed a complaint inter-alia stating that her marriage was solemnized as per hindu customs & rituals on 21.02.1997 with petitioner No.1 Gopal Sharma and her parents gave her sufficient ornaments and dowry but after some time of the marriage the petitioners started demanding more dowry and harassing her. To fulfil their demands, her father gave Rs.30,000/-to them but despite that they did not satisfy and started harassing her more & more and even gave beatings but she tolerated. It was also stated that on 112.1998 her husband Gopal Sharma, Omprakash, Sitaram and Radheyshyam threatened her that either she should bring 2 lac rupees or seek divorce else they would kill her by burning etc.

3. FIR No. 44/2000 was registered at Police Station Napasar and after investigation the police filed charge-sheet against two persons and filed negative report in respect of other eight persons against whom also the complaint was made. Against that, the petitioners filed a revision before the lower Court and the complainant also filed a protest petition on 211.2000 stating that her complaint be also taken into consideration with the case file under Section 210 CrPC and the matter may be inquired on that basis.

4. After filing of challan in the Court and on receipt of the file from revisonal Court, arguments were heard on cognizance by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class Bikaner in relation to the application filed by complainant Anusuiya Sharma and the statement of complainant was recorded under Section 200 CrPC. Statements of Purshottam, Vishnukant Joshi, Gopal Joshi, and Amar Chand were also recorded under Section 202 CrPC.

5. The complainant-respondent before the Judicial Magistrate reiterated the averments made in the complaint and the other witnesses supported her. The learned Magistrate, prima facie, finding a case of taking cognizance under Section 498-A and 406 IPC against others also, took cognizance and they were summoned through bailable warrants.

6. Aggrieved, the accused-petitioners have approached this Court by filing the present petition.

7. The case of the petitioners is that the complainant has filed a false case against the petitioners as the complainants behaviour was very rude, harsh and cruel against the petitioners and especially against her husband Gopal Sharma -petitioner No.1, and looking to the rude behaviour of the complainant after suffering a lot of humiliation from the side of complainant, the husband of the complainant filed a divorce petition on 18.01.2000 at Delhi. The complainant being annoyed with the filing of divorce petition by her husband Gopal Sharma, lodged a false complaint in question before the Judicial Magistrate, Bikaner and succeeded to implicate all relatives of petitioner No.1 in false case.

8. It is also the case of the petitioners that the marriage was solemnised in the year 1997 and since then till 2000, the complainant had been living with her husband. According to them, this fact itself shows that petitioner No.1 tolerated the activities of complainant and tried to pursuade her but ultimately when water passed over head, the petitioner No.1 moved divorce petition for peace between the parties. They denied having made any demand of dowry from the complainant.

9. It has also been contended that the learned Magistrate has failed to consider that petitioners No.2 to 10 have been living separately and they are residents of different locations like Delhi, Village Padiyara District Churu and out of them, one is resident of even Assam State and this fact also shows that petitioners No.2