IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.17523 of 2007 MANOJ SHARMA & ORS Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 5. 18.9.2008. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The grievance of the petitioner is against the order dated 14.2.2007 passed in Complaint Case No.454 of 2006 by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Patna City, whereby he has taken cognizance of the offences under Sections 420/504 and other allied Sections of the I.P.C. against the petitioners after due inquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C. It is by now well settled by a catena of decisions both of the Apex Court as also this Court that since the object of the inquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C. is to ascertain whether the allegations made in the complaint are intrinsically true, the Magistrate acting under Section 203 Cr.P.C. has to satisfy himself that there is sufficient ground for proceeding. In order to come to the conclusion he is entitled to consider the evidence taken by him or recorded in an inquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C. He is not entitled to rely upon any material besides this. Where there is prima facie evidence, even though an accused may have a plausible defence that the offence is committed by some other person, the matter has to be left to be decided by the appropriate forum at the appropriate stage and issue of process cannot be refused. Gainful reference may be made to the case of Chandradeo Vs.Prakash Singh(AIR 1963 SC 1430). - 2 - In view of the categoric decisions of the Apex Court, I find no merit in this application which is dismissed. P.S. (Abhijit Sinha,J)