IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.13317 of 2007 RAM LAGAN SAH Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 5 09-09-2008 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned A.P.P. for the State. The grievance of the petitioner is against the order dated 12.9.2005 passed in Cr.Revision No.71 of 2005, whereby Sri Shanti Kumar, the then 2nd Addtitional Sessions Judge, Gopalganj has set aside the order dated 9.3.2005 passed by Sri D.M.Tripathi, Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Gopalganj in Complaint Case No.1121A of 2003, whereby he had taken cognizance of offence punishable under Section 436 I.P.C. and summoned the petitioner to face the trial. The petitioner has approached this Court after one and half year of the passing of the Revisional Court’s order and even before this Court a lackadaisical attitude was resorted to inasmuch as adjournments were resorted to until this application was dismissed for non-prosecution vide order dated 5.2.2008 and was subsequently restored. From perusal of the Revisional court’s order, it appears that there was no protest petition or complaint petition within the meaning of provision for any allegation of facts worth disclosing any offence. It further appears that from perusal of so called protest petition it was found that only grievance against the Investigating Officer was made and no facts constituting any offence was disclosed in the protest - 2 - which might have been treated as complaint. It has further been observed that in absence of a complaint as defined under Section 2(d) Cr.P.C. worth disclosing the allegation of facts, the same cannot be proceeded with and on such petition no cognizance can be taken. The reasoning assigned by the Revisional court for setting aside the cognizance order taken by the learned Magistrate are immaculate and can brook no controversy. I find no merit in this application, which is accordingly dismissed. ( Abhijit Sinha, J) NKS/-