IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.222 of 2006 PARSURAM SHAH & ORS Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 5 31.07.2008 This application has been filed against the order dated 07.01.2006 passed by 9th Addl. Sessions Judge, Saran at Chapra in Cr. Revision No.208 of 2004, thereby the learned court has directed the court below to make further enquiry in the case. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. No one appeared on behalf of the opposite party in spite of valid service of notice. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the impugned order is bad and illegal and is against the provision of Section 398 of the Cr.P.C. The revision before the Addl. Sessions Judge who not against the order of dismissal of complaint. The cognizance has already been taken by the Magistrate in the complaint case and hence the learned Addl. Sessions Judge had no power to order for further enquiry. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners and also the provisions enshrined in Section 398 of the Cr.P.C., since the revision has not been preferred against any order of dismissal of the complaint. The Addl. Sessions Judge had no power to direct the lower court for further enquiry under Section 398 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, this revision is allowed and the impugned order is hereby set aside. Mkr. (Ghanshyam Prasad, J)