IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.57749 of 2007 1. PREM SHANKAR PANDEY 2. SACHINDRA PANDEY @ SHIV CHANDRA PANDEY 3. BACHHANAND PANDEY ALL SONS OF RAM BAHADUR PANDEY, RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE FATHEPUR, NAYATOLA, P.S. & DISTRICT SHIVHAR .. PETITIONERS Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. PRABHUKANTH MISHRA, S/O SURYADEV MISHRA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BOKANA MISHRA TOLA, P.S. PATHJAHI, DISTRICT EAST CHAMPARAN .. OPPOSITE PARTIES **** /3/ 23.04.2010 Heard the counsel for the parties. 2. This application is directed against the order, dated 31.07.2007, passed in Shivhar P.S. Case No. 50 of 2003 by which the cognizance has been taken against the petitioners. 3. However, the first information report was filed earlier for offence under Sections 304B and 201/34 of the Penal Code in Shivhar P.S. Case No. 50 of 2003. The final form was submitted in that case, but, since a protest petition was filed after acceptance of the final form the case proceeded, during investigation the statement of the informant and witnesses has been taken and the cognizance has been taken on 11.10.2004 against six accused persons named in the protest petition. 2 However, subsequently the police proceeded with the investigation in the said Shivhar P.S. Case No. 50 of 2003 and submitted a charge sheet. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that for the same offence in the same case two orders taking cognizance is not permitted. 5. Hence, the order, dated 31.07.2007, taking cognizance is not sustainable in view of fact that cognizance has already been taken on 11.10.2004 on protest-cum-complaint and, hence, impugned order is set aside. However, it has been stated whether the case has been committed or not it is matter of subject to law. 6. This application is allowed. S.A. ( Gopal Prasad, J. )