IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.16609 of 2008 YASIR IMAM son of Shahid Imam, resident of Mohalla-Central Excise Colony, Type-III, Qrs. No.113, P.S.- Shashtri Nagar, P.O.Ashiana Nagar, Dist.Patna. ….. …..Petitioner Versus STATE OF BIHAR ….. ….Opp. Party ----------- 2. 1.7.2010. Herad Mr. K.M.Mishra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The sole petitioner, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this court under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has prayed for quashing of first information report in Gardanibagh P.S. Case No.579 of 1998. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that after registering first information report, the police submitted charge sheet. However, since part of the case diary was not sent along with the charge sheet, the learned Magistrate did not take cognizance of the offence. Learned counsel for the petitioner has brought on record an order dated 10.8.1999, which corroborates the fact that in absence of complete case dairy, the court has not taken cognizance and show cause notice was issued to the investigating officer and also directed for sending case diary from paragraphs 1 to 30. Learned counsel for the petitioner, while making prayer for quashing of the first information report, submits that since long no step has been taken pursuant to the charge sheet, it is a fit ground for quashing of the first information report. Learned 2 counsel has relied upon a judgment reported in 1996(2) PLJR (SC)122 (“Common Cause A Registered Society, through its Director Vs. Union of India and Ors.). Accordingly, learned counsel, on the ground of delay, submits that the prosecution should be quashed. I have perused the first information report. The informant, who was Guard/peon of a school bus has alleged that while the school bus carrying school girls was going on, this petitioner along with other accused persons tried to outrage the modesty of a girl and on intervention of the informant he was caught by this petitioner and thereafter he was assaulted. In this case after investigation police submitted charge sheet. However, from the order dated 10.8.1999 it appears that in absence of complete case diary, the learned Magistrate has not taken cognizance and show cause notice was issued to the investigating officer. On perusal of the order dated 10.8.1999 it appears that no cognizance order was passed till 10.8.1999 and, accordingly, no proceeding was pending before the court below. This court is of the opinion that in absence pendency of any proceeding, it would not be appropriate to exercise power under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Proceeding which is primarily to be exercised to prevent abuse of the process of the court. Moreover, first information report indicates offence committed by the accused persons. Since no proceeding is pending, it is difficult for this court to allow the prayer of the petitioner for quashing of the first information report. Once after registration of the first 3 information report investigation commenced and thereafter it resulted in submission of the charge sheet, there is no point to quash the first information report, which discloses cognizable offence. Accordingly, this court is not inclined to exercise power under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in favour of the petitioner. However, after noticing the order dated 10.8.1999, it is necessary to direct the court below to examine as to under what circumstance entire case diary was not produced by the investigating officer. Accordingly, court below is directed to take steps to proceed in the matter. With the above observation and direction, the petition stands rejected. Let a copy of this order be sent to the court below forthwith. Md.S. ( Rakesh Kumar, J.)