IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.17565 of 2001 HARI GOVIND SINGH & ANR Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- For the petitioners: Shri Bhavesh Kumar, Advocate For the O.P. No. 2: Shri Anish Chandra Sinha & S.M. Ghosh, Advocates ----------- 7/ 19.8.2010 Heard counsel for the parties. It is out and out an example of poor knowledge of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhojpur at Arrah in Charpokhari P.S. Case No. 93 of 1996 that while passing an order dated 9.2.2001, he was proceeding to consider the paragraphs of the case diary and protest petition simultaneously. He was probably propounding a new law which was unknown to the realm of judiciary. It could have been a matter which could have been directed to be recorded in his personal records that the officer lacks in criminal law but, probably, since the officer might have retired on account of lapse of nine years, I am dropping the idea in making entry in his personal records. It was not that the Chief Judicial Magistrate was making new inventions in law, rather, arguments made by learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 were also falling on the same line. He was distorting a decision of this Court rendered in the case of Nageshwar Rai Vs. State of Bihar reported in 1986 P.L.J.R. 212 when he was attempting to impress upon me that while passing an order of cognizance, Chief Judicial Magistrate was required to take into consideration the police records as well as a protest petition. 2 After having heard him, this appears completely distortion of the view which was expressed by the Hon’ble Judge in that decision. The Chief Judicial Magistrate has referred to three paragraphs of the case diary, i.e., 131, 132 and 136 to summon the petitioners, considering that, I do not interfere with the order taking cognizance and leave it to the magistrate to look to the case diary, particularly, those specific paragraphs and if he finds that all those paragraphs contain any of the statements of those witnesses who implicated the petitioners, he shall proceed against them, else he shall discharge them. The petition stands disposed of with the aforementioned observation/direction. Anil/ ( Dharnidhar Jha, J.)