IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.29765 of 2007 1. Kanti Devi, Wife of Lalita Ram. 2. Lalita Ram, Son of Late Ram Raj Ram. Resident of Village Hurka, P.S. Tilouthu, District Rohtas. At present, Nai Bazar, Buxar, Ward No. 4, P.S. Buxar, District Buxar. ------ Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Ravindra Prasad, Son of Gaisal Lal Basat, Resident of Village Pichhala, P.S. Kishanganj, District Kishanganj. 3. Ashok Kumar Paswan, Son of Palan Paswan, Resident of Village- Mahin Gaon, P.S. Kishanganj, District Kishanganj. 4. Ramchandra Paswan, Son of Ram Swarup Paswan, Resident of Khadi Basti Daula, P.S. Kishanganj, District Kishanganj. 5. Gundhar Ravidas, Son of Dhananjay Das, Resident of Village Khadi Basti Daula, P.S. Kishanganj, District Kishanganj. 6. Chandramor Paswan, Son of Upendra Paswan, Resident of Village Mahin gaon, P.S. Kishanganj, District Kishanganj. 7. Umesh Paswan, Son of Ramswaroop Paswan, Resident of Village Khadi Basti Daula, P.S. Kishanganj, District Kishanganj. 8. Baleshwar Ram, Son of Ram Prasad Ram, Resident of Village Pichhala, P.S. Kishanganj, District Kishanganj. ------ Opposite Parties ----------- 5 17.8.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and counsel for the Informant as also counsel for the State. In a police case, if the learned Magistrate differing with the final form had recorded an order taking cognizance and issuing summons to the petitioners which also stood affirmed in the revisional order by the learned District Judge, this Court would hardly find any material to interfere with the impugned order. The defence version of the 2 petitioners as against the impugned order taking cognizance cannot be looked into at this stage by this Court for exercise of its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, this application, being wholly misconceived, is hereby dismissed. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)