IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3753 of 2010 1. RAJESHWAR SINGH S/O LATE RAM BRIKSH SINGH R/O VILL.- MAHARAJAGANJ, P.S.- NAUBATPUR, DISTT.- PATNA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DIRECTOR, SECONDARY EDUCATION H.R.D. DEPARTMENT, NEW SECRETARIAT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER PATNA, DISTT.- PATNA 4. THE INCHARGE PRINCIPAL +2 GOVT. HIGH SCHOOL, NAUBATPUR, PATNA ----------- 2. 09.03.2010 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 31.8.2009 and the consequential order dated 28.1.2010 by which directions have been given for institution of a First Information Report against the petitioner on certain allegations. Learned Counsel for the petitioner seeks to persuade the Court that the First Information Report was not justified on facts and was not maintainable as being based on non-est grounds. The writ petition primarily appears to preempt the institution of a First Information Report against the petitioner. This Court can do no better than quote Para 6 and 7 from the judgement reported in (2008) 8 SCC 300 (Naresh Kavarchand Khatri Vs. State of Gujarat and another) which reads as follows:- “6. The power of the court to interfere with an investigation is limited. The police authorities, in terms of Section 156 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, exercise a statutory power. The Code of Criminal Procedure has conferred power on the statutory authorities to direct transfer of an investigation from one police station to another in the event it is found that they do not have any jurisdiction in the matter. The court should not interfere in the matter at an initial stage in regard thereto. If it is found that the investigation has been conducted by an investigating officer who did not have any territorial jurisdiction in the matter, the same should be transferred by him to the police station having the requisite jurisdiction. 7. It is of some significance that the High Court exercised its jurisdiction even without notice to the petitioner. The investigation has to be carried out on the basis of the allegations made. The first informant is required to be examined; statements of his witnesses were required to be taken; the accused were also required to be interrogated. The undue haste with which the High Court has exercised its jurisdiction, in our opinion, should not be encouraged.” There is no occasion for the Court to interfere at this stage. If the petitioner be aggrieved by institution of a First Information Report it is always open for him to question the same in an application under Section 482 Cr. P. C. which has then to be considered on its own merit in accordance with law. This application is dismissed. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)