#Protest Petition

The Himachal Pradesh High Court ruled that a person who may become an accused cannot question a direction under CrPC 156(3) to investigate, and that a handwriting expert’s report must be supported by additional evidence before it can underpin a conviction. This limits challenges to investigative orders and raises the evidentiary threshold for expert testimony, affecting future forgery and fraud prosecutions.

Allahabad High Court affirms that a Magistrate can take cognizance under Section 190(1)(b) CrPC even after a police final report, if prima facie evidence exists. The court ruled that the plea of alibi cannot be considered at this stage, and judicial interference is warranted only if the order is perverse. This reinforces the Magistrate's independent authority to evaluate evidence beyond police conclusions.

The Karnataka High Court ruled that a Magistrate cannot take cognizance of a protest petition without first examining the police 'B' report, reinforcing the principle of natural justice in criminal proceedings. This judgment mandates judicial scrutiny of closure reports before accepting complaints, impacting procedural fairness in criminal trials.