IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.46914 of 2007 SUKHDEB MAHTON Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 4. 09.07.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner prays for quashing of the order of cognizance under Section 364 A of the Penal Code. Reliance is placed on the order passed in Cr. Misc. No. 19471 of 2003 quashing the order taking cognizance against co- accused by order dated 10.5.2004. First information report was registered against unknown. The police after investigation submitted final report on 21.8.2000 that the case was true but that there was no clue. In April, 1997, statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded of the victim naming the petitioner. On 8.2.2002 cognizance has been taken on basis of the materials on record differing with the Police report. The Magistrate arrived at the conclusion on discussion of the materials in the case diary and has even expressed his doubts about the manner of investigation done. The order dated 10.5.2004 in Cr. Misc. No. 19471 of 2003 is based only on the ground of the statement made under Section 164 Cr.P.C. of the victim; that the Magistrate has taken cognizance after consideration of the materials in the case diary and even the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. which was prior to the order of cognizance, appears to have been overlooked. Obviously it suffers from an error of record. Additionally, in that case the petitioner came with promptitude in 2003 when the order was passed in May, - 2 - 2004. Presently, the petitioner came to the Court more than three years later in 2007. Nothing has been placed on record of the developments thereafter in the trial which obviously has commenced. In all of the aforesaid reasons, this Court is not persuaded to grant relief to the petitioner on the simple premise of the order in Cr. Misc. No. 19471 of 2003. The application is, accordingly, dismissed. AKS/ (Navin Sinha, J.)