IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.18211 of 2010 BALRAM YADAV S/O BAGHAN YADAV, R/O VILLAGE VISHESHWAR DERA CHAKKI, P.S.- BRAHMPUR, DISTRICT- BUXAR. ……………… Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. NAR SINGH YADAV S/O LATE DADAN YADAV 3. RAM VYAS YADAV S/O LATE BHAGAN YADAV 4. SHIV DHANI YADAV S/O LATE SAWAROO YADAV 5. VIKRAMA YADAV S/O LATE RAMJANAM YADAV 6. VAKIL YADAV S/O LATE RAMJANAM YADAV 7. TARA DEVI W/O LATE DADAN YADAV 8. NAND JI YADAV S/O LATE RAM KUNWAR YADAV ALL R/O VILLAGE- PIRIYA, P.S.- DUMRAON, DISTRICT- BUXAR. ……………….Opposite Parties ----------- 2. 28.01.2011 Heard the parties. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 24.2.2010 passed by A.D.J., F.T.C.-II, Buxar in Cr. Rev. No. 236/2008, by which he has refused to interfere in the order of cognizance passed in complaint case no. 708 C/2005 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Buxar. The petitioner who happens to be the complainant is aggrieved by the fact that no cognizance was taken under Section 302/201 I.P.C. despite which there being material warranting cognizance under those sections. When he went under revision the petitioner was of the view that these facts could be brought on record by the complainant before charge but at the end he dismissed the revision which in the opinion of the petitioner was causing an obstacle in the mind of the Magistrate in going beyond Sections 344, 120-B I.P.C. In view of such, I direct that the Magistrate shall not be prejudiced by the order of the Revisional Court and pass appropriate orders with regard to the offence made out in the case. With these observations, the application is disposed off. Fahad. ( Anjana Prakash, J. )