MITHLESH CHAUDHARY, J.

Heard Sri Dilip Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioner, the learned AGA representing the State and Sri G. C. Saxena, learned Counsel representing respondent No. 2.

2. The writ petition seeks issuance of a writ in the nature of certiroari quashing the FIR of case crime No. 18 of 2000 under Section 147, 323, 504 and 506 IPC and Section 3 (1) (x) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Police Station Nanauta District Saharanpur as well as the order dated 21-7-2001 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deobandh, District Saharanpur in case No. 133 of 2001, Sunita v. Virendra and others. A perusal of the impugned FIR prima facie indicates commission of cognizable offence and hence we are not persuaded to quash the same at this stage.

3. So far as question of the impugned order dated 21-7-2001 is concerned, it would appear that on application under Section 156 (3) of the Crpc, learned Magistrate directed the police to register and investigate the case under appropriate provision of law. The police on investigation seems to have submitted a final report against which protest petition was filed by the complainan

Click Here to Read the rest of this document