"There is no doubt that the court below has misdirected himself and materially erred in deciding the whole matter. Admittedly, the protest cum complaint petition was treated by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate as a complaint, and this fact appears in the impugned order.

However, the mandatory provisions of Section 200, CrPC, and that of Section 203, CrPC, have not been complied with. Meaning thereby, neither the complainant was examined on sworn affirmation nor were his witnesses examined.

Summarily, the court below treated the petition in a casual manner and rejected the same, accepting the final report. Consequently, the entire order refusing to take cognizance and to proceed against the accused is vitiated by non-compliance with the provisions of Section 200, CrPC, and the onward provisions of the new CrPC meant for dealing with the complaint case.

On this score alone, the impugned order was liable to be set aside. It was held that the rejection of the complaint filed against the final report by the police without complying with the provisions of Section 200 and 203, CrPC, was illegal."