IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.1619 of 2009 Raj Kumar Singh son of Ram Naresh Singh, resident of village Kutha Dih, police station Barhiya, District- Lakhisarai. … Petitioner. Versus The State Of Bihar … Opposite Party. ----------- 2. 21.11.2011 The accused- petitioner has preferred this revision application against the order dated 10.7.2009 passed by the learned CJM, Lakhisarai in G. R. No. 146 of 2008 arising out of Barhiya P. S. Case No. 16 of 2008 by which the cognizance has been taken against the petitioner and others and an order has been passed for issuance of summons against the accused for the offence punishable under Sections 386, 379, 323, 307, 302, 120 B/34 I.P.C. and 27 of the Arms Act. The main contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is not named in the FIR, the police filed application for issuance of warrant of arrest which has been rejected by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate three times and there is no material in the case-diary for taking cognizance against the accused- petitioner. Learned counsel for the State submits that during investigation the name of the 2 petitioner has appeared as an accused and some material has also come to show that the petitioner was also one of the persons who has participated in the occurrence. In support of his contention he has referred to several paragraphs including paragraph nos. 21, 40, 42 and 83 of the case-diary. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State and on perusal of the impugned order it appears that the name of the petitioner does not find place in the FIR but during investigation his name has appeared as one of the accused and after investigation charge-sheet has been submitted against the accused including the petitioner thereafter cognizance has been taken by the learned Magistrate for the offence punishable under Section 307/302/120B and other section of IPC and 27 of the Arms Act. Considering the facts and circumstances stated above, I do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned order. This petition is dismissed. Kanchan (Amaresh Kumar Lal, J.)