IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.11700 of 2006 NARENDRA KUMAR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 6 31.7.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned A.P.P. for the State. Although notice was issued to O.P.No. 2, the complainant and was validly served on her she has chosen not to appear in the case and contest it. The grievance of the petitioner is against the order dated 20.6.2005 passed in Gardanibagh P.S. Case No. 287 of 2005, G.R. No. 1596 of 2005, whereby cognizance has been taken of the offence under section 379 I.P.C. by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna. A further prayer has been made for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding against the petitioner. The submission advanced on behalf of the petitioner is that although the petitioner was not named in the F.I.R., nor he was put on T.I. parade where he could have been identified by the informant and even when no recovery was made from his person or possession, Police has, due to vengeance, submitted a charge sheet against him and the Court below has mechanically taken cognizance notwithstanding the fact that there was no iota of evidence against him in the case diary. From perusal of the impugned order taking cognizance it appears that Court took cognizance after perusal of the charge sheet and the case diary from which a prima facie case appears to have been made out. - 2 - While taking cognizance the subjective satisfaction of the Magistrate is sufficient and is not required to state or give reasons leading to his satisfaction. I find no merit in this application which is dismissed. However, petitioner shall be at liberty to raise all these issues at the time of framing of charge. Spd/- (Abhijit Sinha, J.)