Judgment 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order dated 22.2.2003 is bad in law on the ground that the court below has proceeded to take cognizance on the basis of the protest petition without holding any enquiry as envisaged by the Code of Criminal Procedure. He submits that the court below while considering the protest petition simply looked into the materials collected during the investigation and proceeded on the said basis. 3. From perusal of the impugned order dated 22.2.2003 it is apparent that the protest petition was before the court below when the matter was being considered. The court below was obviously required to consider the protest petition in accordance with law and would not have taken into account the entire materials collected during the investigation. For the said reason the order dated 22.2.2003 is not sustainable and the same is quashed. 4. The matter is now remanded to the court below to proceed afresh in the matter in accordance with law. 5. This application stands disposed of.