CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3163 OF 2007 In the matter of an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure --------- BIRENDRA KUMAR SINGH, Son of Late Radha Mohan Singh, resident of Mohalla-Rajbanshi Nagar, Siwan, P.S. Siwan Town, District-Siwan --------------- Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. Mukul Kumar, Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Siwan, District-Siwan ---------------- Opp.Parties. -------------- P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR Rakesh Kumar, J. On call, none appeared on behalf of the petitioner either to press this petition or to make a prayer for adjournment. However, Sri A.M.P.Mehta , learned Addl.Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State is present. 2. The sole petitioner, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has prayed for quashing of an order dated 28.8.2006 passed by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Siwan in Trial No.3522 of 2006 arising out of Siwan Town P.S. Case No.69 of 2005. By the said order, learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of offences under Sections 420,467,468,469,470 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. On perusal of the record, it appears that on the basis of written report submitted by the Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad –cum- Circle Officer, Siwan, an F.I.R. vide Siwan Town P.S. Case No.69 of 2005 was registered on 16.3.2005. It 2 was alleged that the petitioner had committed offences under Sections 420,467,468,470 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. After registering the case, the same was thoroughly investigated and thereafter, chargesheet was submitted by the police. After submission of the chargesheet , learned Magistrate examined the record and the police report and thereafter he has taken cognizance of offences as mentioned above. 4. After going through the order of cognizance, the Court is satisfied that while taking cognizance, the learned Magistrate has committed no error. The Court is of the opinion that while hearing a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure that too against the order of cognizance or order of rejection of discharge petition, it is not required for this Court to examine and peruse the entire case diary. 5. Accordingly, I do not fine any merit in the petition and the petition stands rejected. 6. In view of rejection of the present petition, interim order of stay dated 14.2.2007 stands automatically vacated. 7. It appears from the record that in the present case, case diary was also received which is lying with the present petition. Office is directed to remit back the case diary along with a copy of this order. Patna High Court,Patna Dated : the 29th October,2010 Nawal Kishore Singh/ N.A.F.R. ( Rakesh Kumar, J.)