IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.43331 of 2007 1. GOPALJEE PRASAD, son of Sri Badri Narayan Prasad, resident of Mohalla- Shambika, Path, New Delian, Dehri on Sone, P. S. Dehri, District- Rohtas. At present posted as Senior Internal Auditor, Branch Office Bhringi, Durgapur, Punjab National Bank. Distt- Baradwan (West Bengal) 2. Yogendra Prasad s/o Late Bansi Ram resident of village- Chandasi, P.S. Chandasi, Mughalsarai, District- Chandauli, Uttar Pradesh. At present posted as Special Assistant Punjab National Bank, Akodhi Branch Mohania, District- Kaimur. .. Petitioners. Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. Birendra Kumar Singh son of Sri Arjun Singh resident of village- Khamodoura, P. S. Durgawati, District- Kaimur (Bhabua). At present R/o Mohania, P. S. Mohania, District- Kaimur (Bhabua). … Opp. Parties. ----------- 4. 19.03.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioners. Despite service of notice, no one has appeared on behalf of opposite party no. 2. The impugned order taking cognizance for offence under Sections 323 and 504 of Indian Penal Code is sought to be assailed only on the ground that when the court below had instituted an enquiry under Section 202(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) and had obtained the report of Senior Manager of the Punjab National Bank, it was at least required to refer to the enquiry report before rejecting the same and taking cognizance on the basis of those uncontroverted allegations which at one point of time had compelled the 2 court itself to send the matter for an enquiry under Section 202(3) Cr.P.C.. From the reading of the impugned order it is found that though the court below had referred the matter for enquiry under Section 202(3) Cr.P.C. but has given no reasons for discarding the same in the impugned order taking cognizance. That is wholly impermissible in law. That apart, when it is found that opposite party no. 2 the complainant was himself not applicant for grant of loan by the Bank through the petitioner the Branch Manager and infact had filed the application for loan for his parents aged between 65 to 70 years, who were not eligible for grant of loan under the banking rule it becomes clear that it is vexatious complaint case filed by the complainant only to humiliate the bank officials including the petitioners. Such malicious prosecution if allowed to continue by itself would amount to gross abuse of the process of the court. That being so, this application is allowed and the impugned order taking cognizance is set aside. kanchan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)