IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.47680 of 2007 MD.SAMSHUL HAQUE @ SHAMSHUL MIAN & ANR Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 5/ 06/03/2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. The police after investigation submitted the final form. A protest petition was then filed which came to be rejected without enquiry. The revisional court has interfered with the same and set aside the rejection order. Learned counsel for the petitioners, from the revisional order dated 7.3.2007 in Cr. Revision No.260/04 by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Bhagalpur submits that the matter may be remanded on the issue of consideration and disposal of the protest petition in accordance with law, the revisional order requires interference to the extent that it set aside the order of the Magistrate accepting the final form submitted after police investigation. From the orders on record, this Court is unable to satisfy itself, if the final form came to be accepted after notice to the informant and hearing him on the final form. If that has not been done, surely, there is a procedural irregularity requiring no 2 interference with the revisional order. But, if the final form came to be accepted after hearing the informant, quite obviously, the revisional order is not sustainable to that extent. These are the issues of facts, to be decided by the Magistrate himself from the records of his own proceedings in light of the aforesaid discussions, but only with regard to the issue of the final form. The application stands disposed with the aforesaid observations. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)