IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CRMMO No.51 of 2009 Date of decision : June 17, 2009 Gurminder Singh …Petitioner. Versus Youdhbir Singh and others …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner : Mr. Anoop Rattan, Advocate. For the Respondents : None. Surjit Singh, J ( Oral ) Cr.MMO No.51/2009 Heard and gone through the record. 2. Petitioner filed a complaint against the respondents, one of whom is a police official, alleging that they all came to his shop and gave him beating. Learned Judicial Magistrate, after recording the statements of the complainant and his witnesses, under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has passed an order for inquiry by Dy. S.P. of the area, in accordance with the provision of Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 3. The only submission, which has been made on behalf of the petitioner, is that when the statements of the complainant and his witnesses had been recorded, under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, there was no need for referring the complaint for inquiry to the Dy. S.P. 4. A bare reading of the provision of Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure shows that the Magistrate has the discretion to get Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? …2… the matter inquired into from any person, only after he records the statements of the complainant and the witnesses, under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, when the case is not exclusively triable by the Sessions Court or when the complaint is not made by the Court. Thus, the submission made on behalf of the petitioner is without any substance. Hence, the same is dismissed. Cr.MPs No.266 & 267 of 2009 Infructuous. June 17, 2009(sd) (Surjit Singh), J.