IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.30725 of 2008 1. Ramanand Prasad S/o Late Ram Ekwal Prasad 2. Alok Kumar, S/o Shri Ramanand Prasad Both R/o Mohalla Janki Asthan, Riga Road, Ward no.2, Sitamarhi Town P.S. & Distt. Sitamarhi. ----Petitioners. Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Brij Kishore Paswan S/o Tuntun Paswan, R/o vill. Basuria tola, P.S.Riga, Distt. Sitamarhi, at present care of Shri Narendra Kumar Singh, Mohalla Janki Asthan, Ward no.2, Riga Road, Sitamarhi. ----Opp.Parties. ----------- 03 22.07.2010 Heard both sides. Petitioners who are accuseds of Sitamarhi Riga P.S. Case no. 47 of 2006, instituted under diverse Sections of the Penal Code including Section 307 of the Penal Code are aggrieved by order dated 30-04-2008 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi. By the said order learned Magistrate upon hearing the parties including the informant on his protest petition differed with the police report and has taken cognizance under diverse Sections of Penal Code including Section 307 of the Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioners while assailing the sustainability of the order submits that investigation pursuant to the F.I.R. was taken up. In course of investigation, the witnesses did not support the allegation. Consequently final form was submitted whereby the Investigating Officer found the accusations untrue and the petitioners herein were not sent up for trial. Learned counsel while conceding the power/jurisdiction of the Magistrate to differ with the police report and take cognizance contends that 2 for such differing and taking cognizance the Magistrate is required to assign reasons. Since the same is lacking in the present case, the order impugned is required to be interfered with. Learned counsel representing the informant/opposite party no.2, on the other hand, submits that as per allegation in the F.I.R. the informant was captivated, tied by neck with the help of a rope and dragged for a long distance. The allegation is further that a knife blow was inflicted which fortunately hit non vital part of the informant. It is contended that doctor has found injury on the neck which was dangerous to life. This Court considered the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and perused the materials on record including the impugned order. Learned Magistrate has found that the F.I.R., injury report and materials collected in the case diary particularly those contained in paragraph nos. 2, 6, 7, and 8 definitely make out a prima facie case for proceeding with the case. This Court does not find any illegality in the order. It is, accordingly, dismissed. At this stage learned counsel for the petitioners states that petitioners shall be agitating grievance(s) at the appropriate stage of the trial. They may do so in accordance with law. Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)