IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.1239 of 2009 SHASHI BHUSHAN RAI ..PETITIONER Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. NAGENDRA SINGH …OPPOSITE PARTIES ----------- 05. 27.09.2010 Petitioner is facing accusations punishable under sections 302 and 120B/34 IPC including section 27 of the Arms Act. He is named in the FIR with certain allegations. On conclusion of investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted, whereby only three accused persons (not the petitioner) were sent up for trial. It appears that a protest application was already filed on behalf of the informant which was kept on record. Subsequently, a supplementary charge-sheet was filed against one accused person. Petitioner herein was, however, not sent up for trial in the aforesaid supplementary charge-sheet. Learned Magistrate, on a consideration of materials appearing from the police papers, differed with the conclusion of the Investigating Officer and came to the conclusion that there is/are prima facie material against the petitioner and accordingly cognizance was taken. The said order was challenged before this court which was considered and rejected. It appears that another criminal miscellaneous application was filed by the petitioner which was disposed with an observation granting him liberty to agitate his grievance at appropriate stage of the case. An application was thereafter filed by the petitioner before the learned Magistrate in seisin of the matter. The petitioner 2 challenged that the issuance of process against him was not in accordance with law. The matter was referred to the learned CJM. By the impugned order, learned CJM has found that earlier on a consideration of materials on record, cognizance was already taken against the petitioner as well. There was no illegality in the order. The application of the petitioner was thus rejected and the matter was referred back to the learned Magistrate for proceeding in accordance with law. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and the State, this court is satisfied that there is no illegality in the order meriting any interference. The application is accordingly dismissed. hr ( Kishore K. Mandal )