IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.44445 of 2007 NAND KUMAR JHA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. SHIV NARAYAN JHA SUMAN 3. SANJAY KUMAR JHA 4. PANKAJ KUMAR JHA ----------- 02/ 16-01-2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner filed a Complaint Case No. 562C of 2000 under Sections 364, 366, 406, 420 of the Indian Penal Code. It was sent for investigation under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. The final report came to be submitted that the allegations were untrue. In the meantime, the petitioner had filed a Protest-cum-Complaint Case No. 01/2001. The Protest-cum-Complaint Case came to be dismissed after enquiry. The contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that the disposal of the Complaint Case without accepting or rejecting the final form submitted by the Police in the earlier Police case is illegal. After the final form was submitted by the Police, the Magistrate should have either differed with the Police Report and taken cognizance or accepted it. If he had differed with it and took cognizance, there was no occasion for the Magistrate to proceed with the Protest-cum- Complaint Case. The enquiry on the Protest-cum-Complaint case shall be deemed to be an acceptance of the final form report submitted by the Police. The petitioner then preferred Criminal Revision No. 126 of 2001 before the A.D.J., F.T.C.V, Katihar. - 2 - This Court has gone through the order of the revisional Court. The revisional Court on detailed consideration arrived at the conclusion after perusal of the case diary that the original Complaint Case filed by the petitioner sent for investigation under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was essentially an attempt to create a defence for the alleged victim Lalit Kumar Jha for kidnapping the daughter of Opposite Party No. 1, for which Railway Police Case No. 13 of 2000 had been lodged by Opposite Party No. 2, the father of the girl. The petitioner is himself stated to be a man of criminal antecedents. From para 21 of Case diary it is apparent that as many as 14 cases were lodged against him. The matter has been tested at the stage of Police investigation, in the Protest-cum-Complaint Case and finally in Revision. The findings of the Police have been corroborated by two orders of the Court. There is no occasion for this Court to interfere in exercise of 482 Cr.P.C. This application is dismissed. S.Sb/- (Navin Sinha, J.)