IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.28161 of 2009 Ranjan Kumar Singh Versus The State Of Bihar -------- For the petitioner: Dr. Amresh Kumar no.1 For the State : Mr. N.N. Tiwary, Addl. P.P. --------- 03 14.9.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State. In my view, this petition filed under section 482 of the Cr. P.C can be disposed off at the admission stage itself. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 10.2.2009 passed by learned Sessions Judge, East Champaran at Motihari in Cr. Misc. no. 207/ 2008 by which and whereunder he dismissed the Cr. Misc. no. 207/2008 filed by the petitioner and refused to direct the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran at Motihari to make an enquiry in respect of order dated 29.7.2003 passed in Pipra P. S. Case no. 97/2002. It would appear from annexure 1 to this petition that the aforesaid Pipra P. S. Case no. 97/2002 was registered under section 302/34 of the IPC on 5.11.2002 against one Babuni Devi and some unknown persons. Furthermore, annexure 2 to this petition reveals that after investigation, the police submitted final report for the offence under section 302 of the IPC showing FIR named accused Babuni Devi and two other persons Kameshwar Singh and Keshaw Singh as suspected accused of the case. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran took cognizance for the offence under section 302/34 of the IPC against Babuni Devi, Kameshwar Singh and the petitioner. - 2 - Petitioner filed Cr. Misc. no. 207/2008 before the learned Sessions Judge, East Champaran at Motihari pointing out this fact that the originally, cognizance was taken against Babuni Devi, Kameshwar Singh and Keshaw Singh vide order dated 29.7.2003 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran but subsequently, some interpolation was made in the aforesaid order and after cutting the name of accused no.3 Keshaw Singh, name of this petitioner was inserted by someone. Accordingly, the petitioner sought direction of learned Sessions Judge, East Champaran at Motihari for making proper enquiry in respect of the above stated interpolation in the order dated 29.7.2003 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran in Pipra P. S. Case no. 97/2002. The learned Sessions Judge, East Champaran at Motihari dismissed the aforesaid Cr. Misc. case passing the impugned order dated 10.2.2009 against which this petition under section 482 of the Cr.P.C has been filed. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that learned Sessions Judge, East Champaran at Motihari ought to have directed the Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran to make an enquiry in respect of the aforesaid interpolation in order dated 29.7.2003 in Pipra P. S. Case no. 97/2002 but the learned Sessions Judge committed error in not giving direction to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran to make an enquiry in respect of the above stated interpolation. So, this court should give direction to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran to hold an enquiry in respect of the above stated interpolation in order dated - 3 - 29.7.2003 of Pipra P. S. Case no. 97/2002. It would appear from perusal of the impugned order that the order dated 29.7.2003 was challenged by the petitioner before this court by filing Cr. Misc. no. 11001/2006 but later on the aforesaid criminal miscellaneous case was withdrawn by the petitioner with liberty to raise all his points at the time of appropriate stage before an appropriate forum. It is manifest from the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner that the aforesaid Cr. Misc. had been filed by the petitioner before this court to challenge cognizance order and the above stated fact of interpolation was also raised before this court on behalf of the petitioner at the time of hearing of the above stated Cr. Misc. no. 11001/2006 and after hearing the aforesaid contention, this court gave liberty to the petitioner to raise all his pleas before the court below at the appropriate stage. So, the petitioner may raise all his pleas before the appropriate court at the appropriate stage. In my view, the learned Sessions Judge has rightly dismissed the Cr. Misc. Case no. 207/2008. On the basis of the aforesaid discussion, I am of the view that this petition is devoid of merit and must be dismissed at the admission stage. In the light of the aforesaid discussion, this petition is dismissed at the admission stage itself. Shahid ( Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J)