Sanjay Misra, J.- A supplementary-affidavit has been filed by learned Counsel for the applicant today. Let the same be taken on record. 2. According to Sri Lovelesh Kumar Verma, learned Counsel for the ap­plicant, the applicant had filed Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 6558 of 2011, Jogendra Prasad Vishwakarma v. State of U.P. and. others, wherein by the or­der dated 15.4.2011, a Division Bench of this Court directed the Superintendent of Police Banda to look into the matter and ensure that proper investigation is conducted in the F.I.R. registered as Case Crime No. 762 of 2010, under sections 498-A, 304-B and 506, I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Banda. According to learned Counsel a certified copy of the order was served on the opposite party on 30.4.2011 and although, the Superintendent of Police, Banda had appointed an Investigating Officer, the Investigating Officer has filed a final report dated 20.6.2011 before the Court concerned, which is disobedience of the direction issued by the Writ Court, inasmuch as according to learned Counsel for the applicant, he has not con­ducted thorough investigation in the matter. 3. Having considered the submission of learned Counsel for the applicant and perused the record, it is quite apparent that the grievance of the applicant is with respect to the investigation done in the aforesaid case by the Investigating Officer. In case the Investigating Officer has filed a final report dated 20.6.2011, the applicant will have full opportunity to contest the same by filing protest application under section 190, Cr. P.C. before the Court con­cerned. 4. This Court in its contempt jurisdiction cannot, even upon exchange of af­fidavits, record any finding with respect to proper or improper investigation done by the Investigating Officer. This contempt petition is dismissed accord­ingly. 5. No order is passed as to costs. Petition Dismissed.