It appears that an F.I.R. being Dumri P.S. Case No. 38 of 2003 was instituted which ended in submission of final form and on being noticed, the informant had filed a protest petition which was numbered as Complaint-cum-Protest Petition No. 724 of 2003 which was treated as a complaint petition and which ultimately was dismissed by the learned Judicial Magistrate vide order dated 18.10.2004. The informant being aggrieved had preferred a revision application being Criminal Revision No. 141 of 2004 which was allowed by the learned Sessions Judge, Giridih and while setting aside the order dated 18.10.2004, the matter was remanded back to the learned Magistrate to consider the evidence available on record and if necessary the complainant be given permission to adduce further evidence. Pursuant to the order of remand 03.03.2005, the impugned order dated 26.07.2005 has been passed by which cognizance has been taken for the offence punishable u/s 306 I.P.C. The revisional court order dated 03.03.2005 admittedly was passed without hearing the petitioners, as the same was confined only to an opportunity of hearing to the counsel for the informant as well as the learned APP. This was against the provisions of law enumerated u/s 398 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. If the learned revisional court was inclined to remand the matter back while setting aside the order dated 18.10.2004 he should have been given an opportunity to the petitioners to put forward their case.
