IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.902 of 2009 KAMALUDDIN & ORS Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 2. 19.3.2010. Heard. The order of cognizance does not appear wrongly passed under the facts of the case. The grievance of the petitioners is that the court which passed the summoning order, i.e., S.D.J.M.,East, Muzaffarpur in Complaint Case No.1272 of 2008 did not have the jurisdiction to try the offence as most of the offences were committed within the jurisdiction of the court at Vaishali at Hajipur. One line of the complaint stated that the complainant was brought and left at a particular place in Muzaffarpur. The law is well settled that a court is competent to take cognizance of the offence even after it does not have the jurisdiction to try the offence, has passed an order summoning an accused, the order of summoning may not be wrong or bad in law. What the court is required to do is to transfer the complaint petition to the court of proper jurisdiction. In the light of the above position of law while dismissing the - 2 - present petition as of no merit, I direct the S.D.J.M.,East, Muzaffarpur to ensure the transmission of the whole records of complaint petition no.1272 of 2008 to his counter part in Vaishali. Let a copy of this order be made available to S.D.J.M.,East, Muzaffarpur as also to the District & Sessions Judge of Muzaffarpur for information and compliance. B.Kr. ( Dharnidhar Jha, J. )